A 9-11 Conspiracy
 

My friend sent me this video about the 9-11 attacks. It may seem long ago, but i find this pretty interesting..

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ge+2nd+Edition

It's around 1 hour 30 min. After watching this, makes me wonder what the government is trying to do.

I hope you know what you're getting into.

Zoom in!

Zoom in!

Zoom in!

Enhance!

See that? It's a missile!

A video on the internet? It must be true!

Come on, Galen, everybody knows the internet is all true, even the stuff the contradicts other stuff. Its just like the bible!

they're all theories. I just never thought there was a different side to this.

I have a few theories of my own. Most of them involve you being dropped onto your head into a bucket of lead paint under some power lines as an infant.

But it's good to know you won't have the presence of mind to conceive a different way of seeing the matter. It's great when idiots go along with my fucked up ideas!

Where the hell have you been since September 12?

I havn't seen that video but heres something...
With America blaming Osama for it, it's kinda stupid. Osama Bin Laden openly admits he hates the American government and plus the whole world considers him a terrorist. Now heres a thing with terrorists, they always claime responsibility for something they do. Like if a terrorist blows up a building, after a few minutes the president gets a call from the terrorist saying "Bitch I blew that shit up cause you didnt do what I asked you to do". So now Osama being a terrorist who openly admits he hates the American government, why the hell would he be afraid and say he didnt plan the 9/11 attack? Would'nt that be his point, like to blow up the building and say he did it cause America isn't listening to him? And then all of a sudden America "finds" a tape of him supposedly laughing and saying he did the 9/11 attack. That video was obviously fake, any one who thinks that video of Osama is real has to be a fuckin idiot. So my point is Osama said he didn't do it which is true cause a terrorist wouldn't deny it. So the 9/11 shit was done by America and Israel.

I believe anything Charie Sheen has to say on anything! He's such a great movie actor! You know... The Chase... Shadow Conspiracy...

He was in Scary Movie 3. What are you talking about, he's an excellent actor.

Also, everyone already knows 9/11 was just a huge conspiracy.

Also, the government is closely watching me, but there's nothing I can do about it.

As maddox said, how would a gas station attendant know wtf a missile sounds like? The quote from the conspiracy theory went something like... "It didn't sound like a plane at all, it sounded more like a missile." Sure buddy...

Don't be so fucking impressionable.

Woo! Conspiracy! Why can't we just take things like they are? I honestly don't believe the government would have done this to its own country. Politicians couldn't have wanted to create a war that bad. I mean, really, if that's what they wanted, we could have just done what the Danish did with that cartoon or something similiar.

I wouldn't say it's unlikely or impossible. Granted he or she is not the first person I would ask.

I used to feel the same way. However, the more I find out about the government in general, the more eager I am to believe in a conspiracy. This kind of thing becomes more and more plausible to me as time goes on.

I lol'd.

I think it's obvious the current administration played a large role in the sept 11 "attacks." There is quite a lot of evidence which shows it was a controlled demolition of the Towers. And the official report passing off that perfect round hole in the Petagon as the impact of a boeing passenger jet is frankly comical. I have no doubt in my mind this is a cover up. Anyone informed on historical events will know about the Reichstag fire and the cover up of Pearl Harbor and the purpose behind these events.

This is obviously a Political Palace conspiracy to spread dissension among innocent forum-goers.

It's been 4½ years already. Let it go.

Wow, that's a really irresponsible and dumb way to respond: "Forget it ever happened! What does that have to do with anything these days?" :sick:

I said let it go.

But since you asked the question (albeit by putting words in my mouth in such a juvenile way)... actually, just what does 9/11 have to do with anything today?

How is my way juvenile? The puke thing? That's what I feel.

It has everything to do with the current state of affairs and it even touches the country in which we both live (I presume). I don't feel like starting discussions on such topics on the net, though.

...

GTFO

No, the misrepresentation of what I said. "Forget it ever happened" vs "Let it go".

FYI, the US administration has already let it go.

It certainly didn't help your view. :boxing: :edgarrock: :cow: :juggler: :edgarrock: :boxing: :doggy: :cow:

If nothing else, though, the question of just how much aircraft wreckage seemed to just...vaporize at the Pentagon is worth an eyebrow raise or two.

I can't conceive of a government in which this is actually carried out with such calculated cruelty...which is exactly why I think we owe it to the conspiracy theorists to hear them out. If all we entertain are gut reactions and popular press, well, we have to wonder just to what extent we can consider ourselves informed.

Everyone KNOWS that the missile was launched by the same guy that shot Kennedy.

And there were no planes that hit the World Trade Center. It was an optical illusion caused by a gas pocket being ignited in the skies thanks to an electrical storm.

But I digress. 911 NEVAAAAR 4GET :tpg:

Why is this still open. This reminds me of the time where somebody thought Microsoft Excel(or something) was related to 9-11, or some garbage like that.

Please give it a rest already, you can read as much into it as you like but nothing's going to be resolved of it. There's theories floating around the internet if you feel like wasting your time reading up on them, but it really isn't going to get you anywhere. Nothing will ever be confirmed.

I still don't believe it is sensical for the american government to pull such an act on their own country, considering the footage of the passengers which was aquired and the fact that there were government employees inside the World Trade Center when it happened. As if america needs more attention.

But yeah, reading into it is pretty retarded. I'd love to ask Bush a bunch of questions - but so would the rest of america, doesn't mean they're going to be answered. No point crying over spilt milk.

And I bet you say this with a straight face, too.
Anyone else sensing a disproportionate desire to sweep things under the rug?

No, no, I'm not trying to be inconsiderate. I'm not american, and it didn't affect me, so I just mind my own business. But there's been just how many theories out there today over this? Way too many to bother reading, that's for sure.

What I'm trying to say is, you can't change the past. There's no point in debating it. There's no point in thrashing over whether or not the government was involved, whether it really was from terrorists, or whether it was a plot to deliberately take control over Iraq. Whatever your view is, it's your view, not necessarily the truth, but not necessarily untrue.

Taking things like this into an internet forum is a very touchy subject. It's like asking if you believe in god or not. Somebody comes along and says no, gives reasons why, people get pissed off. Same applies here, people throw theories around, others don't agree, people get pissed off. It never ends.

Just because you are inclined to believe the government wouldn't do such a thing, does not mean that they did not do it. The ignorance on these subjects astonishes me more and more every day. Just when I think that people may have woken up to this atrocity that has occured, I meet someone like you who would rather ignore it ever happened. Speaking like that is dangerous even if you believe it wasn't the government, because those towers no longer exist. You cannot deny that fact.

I only wish I could see your face if you ever realize what truely goes on in this country. You will feel beyond betrayed.

Edit: Even if you aren't American, you still are affected by the grip of what the US stands for.

I never said to ignore it - I said there's no point thrashing it over on forums, where endless theories arise. That doesn't mean I'm without sympathy for the souls who died that day, but it also doesn't mean I'm going to sit here and debate conspiracy after conspiracy over it.

I don't have an opinion on whether the government were involved in this or not, nor do I intend to. I don't have an opinion on the matter whatsoever, because reading into it is mindless. I just don't see the point in revolving doors which will amount to nothing.

But that's okay, just forget it, forget I even said anything. Apparently I'm "ignorant" because debating theories is appropriate.

Why don't you GTFO, you dumbass? Got anything more to add? I said what I had to say about that message and that's all...

p.s. Elixir is right about this discussion going to the crapper. Nothing will come out of this "debate".

While I agree that we are never going to know exactly what happened that day, talking about it can only inform people. Even if it's only a theory, its up to the person reading it to decide whether to believe it or not.

Although, I can see where you come from not wanting to think about it at all. Ignorance is bliss, but thats your choice.

Aha of course Bush is the devil! I mean after all he planned Katrina to rid all the African American's in New Orleans!

Jesus people, to actually think that 911 was the doing of the government is so simply idiotic it's not even funny. I'm sure some of you are smart people but seriously listen to yourself. I don't think that the government is perfect but I can say and bet my life that Bush loves the country and is doing, whether you agree with his methods or not, the best he can to protect us.

I absolutely resented Clinton and was upset when he was re-elected but I still believed he loved our country and did what he thought was necessary (although I may have disagreed).

All this hate on Bush is simply becoming ridiculous to the point where we are putting ourselves in danger simply for political gain.

PS: Check what the government has to say. It completely disproves this theory. I may post the link later when (if) I have time to dig it up.

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/2...nyewest4zy.gif
GEORGE BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE

Some would call that "naïve."

I don't care, I don't invesnt 100% trust in the government. I never said that either. But I don't think that Bush would kill 3,000 people just to go to war. That is a ridiculous accusation.

On the other side of the coin, don't you think it's just as equally rediculous to kill 3,000 people because you, essentially, get your panties in a twist about a bunch of jews in your neighborhood, and that you get ignored.

But I digress. That's just something I was going to go on, and I'll admit I failed it.

Really, I don't think there could ever be a constructive conversation about 9/11 (NEVAR 4GET,) Bush, Iraq and such.

Actually the 3000 deaths would be to pass the Patriot Act... the war was just a bonus, if you will. War on Terror? Its a neverending war with no real concrete objective, in which American citizens can be labeled terrorists and then be held without due process.

You're kidding, right? Some of you far left liberals are so radical that you can't even be reasoned with. I'm wasting my time in this thread, good bye.

I wish I was kidding, because I would sleep a lot better at night.

Atleast we agree on one thing, some people just won't listen.

Actually, if you have any idea of what the Patriot Act is capable of, he's pretty much spot on.

Don't fling words around to look impressive. We will call you on it.

You must be one of those rare americans.

You helped open up this discussion and then followed it by saying "sry, no thx i dont du thois on teh internet." Hence, GTFO. As for me? Consider it done.

Double Post:
I don't think he's all that rare, I just think the majority of us [Americans] are too bust looking at all the stupid shit he's done to give a fuck his heart is in the right place. After all, him wanting the best for America doesn't get it done.

are you INSANE

The pentagon's walls are designed to withstand hella impact, and meanwhile jets are designed to be lightweight and easily crushable (side effect I guess).

THIS DOES NOT EVEN MAKE SENSE

SKEXIS YOU ARE SMARTER THAN THIS

Double Post:
You are a disgusting individual.

There are plenty very real threats on American liberties on American soil, like illegal wiretapping or prison torture, and here you are masturbating about how well-informed you are because you entertain 9/11 conspiracy theories.

How the hell do you think a government that can't even manage a simple takeover of an impoverished country without blowing it up in a shitstorm of bad press could orchestrate the greatest hoax of the 21st century?

OH BUT LURKER THE PATRIOT ACT

THIS MEANS THE GOVERNMENT WAS AN ACTIVE PARTICIPANT

Fuck you trainable.

I do enjoy masturbating over 9/11 conspiracy theories. You got me there. I enjoy jerking it while reading that the WTC towers was a controlled demolition. I like doing it when I'm reading about the nice punch-card hole in the Pentagon and how a missle did it.

Like I said before, I don't know what happened that day, but the offical story sure as hell doesn't add up. If I could make all the connections and tell you exactly why things are, I wouldn't be talking to you right now. It is obvious to me though, that this was setup to steal our rights. Why? Why not? The government is simply taking more control of what they've been doing all along.

As for Iraq, that is just a big moneysink, both going in and coming out. Its also genocide in my opinion. They're using depleted uranium rounds and ammunition over there. I wish I knew what the purpose was, but I don't.

You can believe what you want lurks, but things aren't going to get any better from here on out.

Well I don't mean to get into semantics over it, but I was talking about the relative amount of wreckage, not just how far it was spread out. (Although that's another question I might raise to a certain physics major of the boards)

I exist only to mortify you, my dear. =D
Sure, a media-intensive event like 9/11 will draw a lot of attention and possibly encourage overanalysis, kinda like a person who's decided that horoscopes really can tell your future. But seriously, don't you think that of all things, this is one we should be absolutely sure about?

If you're going to label someone ("far left liberal") based solely on one point of view he/she expresses - a point of view which doesn't necessarily fit that label - then good riddance.

Double Post:
Clinton was a much better president than Bush.

He eliminated trillions of dollars' worth of deficit, and on top of that the world at large actually saw Clinton's America as a friend rather than a bully.

My goal was not to open the discussion but to comment on how some people think we should ignore or accept it as it is (I'm sorry if that was not the case but that is how I interpreted the short message). After I was asked what exactly it has to do with the current situation, I responded in order to say that it has everything to do with it. I admit it's extremely general but others have conveyed my idea or part of it in more depth without my help.

Trying to make me look like some prepubescent gamer kid won't help your case.

Also, I'm happy to see people like Nehmi who try to think logically and reason instead of jumping on the "Oh yeah! Clinton did it! har har" bandwagon. I hope the "ignorance is bliss" part was not intended for me because that is not how I feel, Nehmi. I just believe that part of what Elixir said is true. It's nearly impossible to discuss serious things like these on such a forum.

Anyone who hasn't been convinced that the government had acts of complicity hasn’t been presented many facts or lack ability to comprehend basic science.

Anyone new to the 911 movement or those who have yet to open their eyes I want you read my post with an open mind and see whose theory is supported by science/history and whose is not.

First I must start with credibility of my claims. There are literally hundreds of experts now supporting the idea of government orchestration.

Ray McGovern - former presidential advisor and CIA analyst
Paul Craig Roberts - father of Reaganomics and former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury
Andreas von Buelow - former German defense minister
David Shayler - former MI5 officer [the MI5 is British counter-intelligence and security]
Michael Meacher - former Blair cabinet member
Morgan Reynolds - former Chief Economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term
Bob Bowman - Former head of Star Wars and air force colonel

This is just a scratch on the surface. You can see plenty of professors and other scholars at
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhoAreWe.html
http://www.physics911.net/spine.htm

Charlie Sheen was not the first one to come up with these theories. Many prominent figures have stated their beliefs for years but the mainstream media gave it no attention. The amount of members joining the movement in the past few months have been exponential and finally the word is reaching millions of Americans. Sheen was the catalyst to breaking the lid on major news outlets.


Let's look at WTC 1, 2 and 7. There are 11 well documented characteristics seen on all 3 buildings that have never before occurred to a steel structure from fires or supposed truss failure.

Sudden Onset
Straight Down
Near Free-Fall Speed
Total Collapse
Sliced Steel
Pulverization of Concrete and Other Materials
Dust Clouds
Horizontal Ejections
Demolition Rings
Sounds Produced by Explosions
Molten Steel


All of these topics are covered in a good amount of depth on a research paper written by Professor David Ray Griffin here:
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

Also, some visual proof to help reinforce these ideas.

http://rds.yahoo.com/S=96781308/K=WT...ibview.7_a.mpg
WTC 7 collapse showing the massive amount of demolition “squibs.” Notice how the outside section of the building is shooting materials out dozens of feet.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...q=loose+change
And here is an excellent documentary titled “Loose Change: 2nd edition” You can watch the entire film for free on Google Video. If you go 52 minutes into the movie you’ll see plenty of squibs and many different shots of the buildings coming down. The huge fireballs seen across entire floors right before the buildings collapse can be spotted in many videos. I highly recommend you view this movie, it covers many aspects of that day very well.


So, these buildings mark the first total collapses due to steel encountering fires. The first problem with this is that there have been hundreds of fires before that have lasted for many hours and never resulted in anything even remotely close to the behavior seen in buildings 1, 2 and 7.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IM...sor.fire.1.wmv
Now that’s a raging inferno, and shows what steel looks like when it finally weakens enough to collapse.

The argument of lacking fireproofing material or that jet fuels fires are much hotter are laughable. Steel has a melting point of 2750F. Jet Fuel fires at absolute maximum could not peak past 1800F. Not only that, but those extremely hot fires last no more then 10 minutes. Regular office fires run anywhere between 400-1200F depending on concentration and what is being ignited. Important to note is the mass amount of black smoke coming from WTC2 before it’s collapse. That is a clear sign of oxygen-deprived fires that are having a hard time surviving.

A major factor behind this poor fire is that the vast majority of jet fuel didn’t even impact WTC2. There are picture diagrams out there that show this in depth including the angles and such, but for your own basic proof just look at the monster fireball explosions made from the 2nd impact in comparison to the 1st. And yet despite these less then ideal fire burning conditions this building burned for much less time and fell first. The 2nd WTC burned for a mere 56 minutes (the 1st WTC burning for an hour and 42 minutes.) Clearly something is wrong here.

Next we must consider the power of the free fall speed argument. Galileo’s Law of Falling bodies states that all matter comes down at a certain rate. In the case of WTC 1 and 2 the rate of “free fall” (no resistance) is 9.2 seconds. The buildings have been officially stated by the 911 commission that collapse time was roughly 10 seconds.

So what’s the significance of this? If you pay attention to videos you can see the building falling as fast as the debris next to it. Now wait a minute.. there is so much undamaged structure down there, surely this isn’t possible. A pancake collapse by nature means it's taking out the lower floors by force but it falls at the rate of nothing being there. This problem cannot be overemphasized.

This video uses real-time physics to demonstrate the upward explosions noted at the WTC collapses and why they are impossible from a “pan cake” collapse. Also, consider the nature of the concrete, it is instantly pulverized and shot hundreds of feet out. Really hot beams weakening in on itself isn’t capable of turning concrete into dust. http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_ht...projectile.avi

Finally there is the molten steel found with temperatures exceeding 2000F weeks after the buildings fell. Its existence at the WTC site was reported by several witnesses, including the two main figures involved in the clean up, Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction, and Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Incorporated. Never mind statements, just look at this picture!

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/hotSlag.jpg
(If the image is not showing here’s the link http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/hotSlag.jpg )

Literally liquid pools of melted steel were found all over. Remember, melting point = 2750F for steel. So what would create this kind of damage to steel? Thermite. It’s temperatures can exceed 5000F and can be used to explain much of the behavior seen at the WTCs.

There is still much I did not cover, but here’s one last interesting note.. On Sept. 10th, 2001 Donald Rumsfeld stated that the government "cannot track 2.3 trillion in transactions." That's $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America. Guess what didn’t make the news after 911?

The reasoning behind why the government would do this is a huge subject that I’m not about to touch. But just consider this, military spending is consuming 46% of our tax money. We’re spending $25,000 a second on war. (actual figure, not an exaggeration or speculation.) Not only that, but our government has no problem admitting to not knowing where a penny out of 2.2 trillion dollars was spent.

The first step for everyone is denial of the idea that the American Government is actually possible of such an event. I to did not first buy into “conspiracy theories” but after a bit of examination and applying some logic the evidence becomes obvious and the amount of support for this "conspiracy theory" is tremendous.

You closed the case just then, Mr. Non-Prepubescent-Grammar-Kid. Thanks for that.

Personally? Well, there's no doubt the goverment did something wrong, but whether or not there's a conspiracy behind it I don't know. I find the video to be more funny than anything else, and all the other information (see above) to be interesting, if nothing else. Sure, there may be some merit to it, but I'm not going to pretend I have the skills necessary to truly understand all the facets of the theories, so instead I just nod, raise an eyebrow, and go on paying taxes.

I'm actually curious, what does the melting point of steel have to do with mechanical faliure?

I'm not touching this topic with a ten foot pole.

He's saying that given the melting point of steel there's no possible way that the structure could've collapsed. The steel couldn't have possibly melted or failed enough to cause a structural collapse. Circumstancial evidence at best. Especially considering the remains of the building was sold as scrap very shortly after. Gee, I wonder why.

Oops! I touched it.

I spent a lot of time explaining temps because it proves that molten steel found in the remains is simply impossible to make with a measly jet fuel fire.

I've said it many times, these 3 buildings are the only examples of it. If the pancake theory was at all plausible the building still wouldn't have collapsed like it did. The outer part of the building would have collapsed leaving at least half of the 47-central support columns intact. The reason that pancake collapses are so invalid and never occur is because of the stress imposed on the building vs. what it's built to withstand.

-Thomas W. Eagar, Professor of Materials Engineering and Engineering Systems MIT



As you can see in the video of the inferno I posted before it takes a lot to make floors collapse from a fire and nothing resembling the WTCs occurred.

See, the thing is, you don't need a metal to melt in order for mechanical failure. Once you hit halfway to the melting point you have to start to worry about increased fatigue and at 70% you're going to get creep and lots of slip going on.

Of course, there's also the phase transformation from ferrite to austenite at 1330°F which makes the steel go from a BCC crystal structure with a lattice constant of around 0.2866nm to austinic FCC with a lattice constant of 0.3605nm or so. That's around a 20% mismatch. Add on to that austenite's higher ductility over ferrite and you get a good reason why a building could collapse well below steel's melting point.

One of the main reasons cited as to why it's not seen in other large buildings during fires is that in this fire, the heat resistant coating around the columns had been blown off during impact. So without both the structural support of the concrete around the steel and its insulating properties, the steel was just sitting there failing.

Also, I believe the explanation for the building collapsing before the stuff on top of it is because of a pressure wave travelling down inside of the building. Much like how when you drop a book there's a high pressure zone underneath the book and a low pressure area above it, air would be forced down infront of the collapsing structure causing those exposions seen in the lobby (air getting pushed down an elevator only has so many places to try and escape).

Funny. What's a Non-Prepubescent-Grammar-Kid? I'd like to know where the grammar part kicks in.

Well, let's examine what the official reports have to say.

-FEMA Report, Chapter 2

The last part of that statement is really funny. It places the blame on regular isolated office fires that I've pointed out problems with. [Black Smoke, hardly any visible flames] :tpg:

Did you even understand a quarter of what RR said.

I have my money on "no."

So why are you still posting.

oh u no

Do you need to see it again?

-Thomas W. Eagar, Professor of Materials Engineering and Engineering Systems MIT

In case you didn't know, 650C would be 1202F. That's considerably hotter then the majority of the fires in the building. If you missed it before, jet fuel couldn't possibly reach higher then 1800F, and that would be a small fraction of fires lasting no more then 10 minutes. [Mind you there is absolutely no proof to confirm temperatures ever got that high.] Even assuming that this some how did massive fatal damage to the steel that would not account for the behavior of WTC 7.

I'm not asking if you can copypasta something an MIT professor said, dipshit.

I'm asking if you can actually READ and COMPREHEND what RacinReaver TYPED from HIS OWN KEYBOARD.

It is you who is not comprehending here, pal.

I personally think I didn't quite comprehend the second paragraph, for the record.

I am going to spell it out for you.

I don't particularly give a shit about what you're saying. However, you care about what you are saying, and what is being said to you in this thread.

Someone is coming along (with far greater knowlege, trust me,) and disproving quite well what you're saying.

Copying and pasting the same shit over and over again and bolding some line is not going to help you.

Give up while you're behind.

ok, let me try and state it a bit better.

Basically the official claims rely heavily on the idea that steel was extremely hot. Big fires that could have reached 1800F or possibly even more. Yet the fact remains that they have no samples to prove this which is what my official quote from NSIT said.

In any event, these hot fires quickly drop in temperature to a normal office fire. So the 10 minute exposure to a few hundred degrees is negligible, and again can't even be accounted for in the WTC7 building.

I personally think I didn't quite comprehend the entire thread. Endless theories and people who don't take my advice(sup phil?) will drag this on and run it into the ground. Great job there, having your opinion questioned by others and getting all defensive with quotes from people with their own concepts.

This never ends.

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/1...7frames9jq.gif

What part of "I don't give a shit" do you have a problem with understanding.

You had a lot of talk there, but you gave absolutely no explanation. So if I'm being disproved I'd sure like to see it. You're simply ignoring everything stated that has some logic behind it. Get off RRs dick and learn to think for yourself.

I was talking to Aardark, btw. You know, give clarification on that 2nd paragraph from before.

This may seem like an off-the-wall question, but why do you keep posting then?

Double Post:
I meant RacinReaver's post, actually. The part about 'crystal structure with a lattice constant of around 0.2866nm', and such.

Copying and pasting the same tired old shit doesn't give you logic. Nor does it make you look smart.

And don't yell at me about ignoring "logic" when you do the same yourself.

I like seeing retards run around in circles.

And I like a good train wreck.

You shouldn't look, but you keep on looking.

Circles huh? I think you've now cited me to RR same post a good 5 times now and still have no opinion of your own. You can't even point out what's so special there. If you paid any attention to my quotes you see I'm not worried about that 1300F figure he gives. Nor do I care for his logic of all of the fireproofing magically being blown off from plane impact. My quotes from experts completely contradict what a non-expert has to say.

Right, but two of the three quotes I have up there are from the official reports. They admit they have no proof of temperatures exceeding 600C (1112F). Further, FEMA states jet fuel fires are not enough to make a building collapse but the overall normal office fire is. Again, WTC2 only burned for 56 minutes.

What part of "I don't give a shit" do you have a problem with understanding.

What part of "I don't give a shit" do you have a problem with understanding.

What part of "I don't give a shit" do you have a problem with understanding.

I like seeing retards run around in circles. :)

I like ending stupidity.

God damnit, accidentally his back and lost the whole post I had written. It's going to be a bit more concise this time, I guess.

I was curious about this article the professor you seem to have copy and pasted most of your arguments from. After a bit of googling (his in-text citations weren't exactly the best) I was able to find the article he refers to. http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1Draft.pdf

His use of elipses and boldface font really do help his argument out.

Let's take a look one of those lines I saw particularly interesting when viewed with the rest of NIST's response.

So there's what he cited. But, perhaps conveniently, he left out the last part of that bullet.

And, let's look at the paragraph following that one.

Oh my, what's this? Finding that those beams weren't really hot actually reinforces their predictions. Guess leaving parts of paragraphs out is a really good tactic.

Well, let's see why they say about that (pardon any typos, the FEMA document doesn't allow copy+pasting).

As any person worth their salt that deals with materials knows, pure temperature alone isn't enough, time is crucial as well.

Oh, and as for your MIT professor, might want to read what he had to say in context as well.

He also decides to comment on the 'implosion issue' you're talking about.

So, yeah, please check your facts next time.

Also, lollin' at how the guy you're copying the original argument from doesn't even have support from anyone in the civil/structural at his own university.

Edit: Screw you guys for ruining the thread even more and making styphon close it. >=(