World Trade Centre Dustification

[john-e89]

In fact ignore everything about it apart from the recruitment of psychopaths, that’s your starting point. Forget everything else. How could they have found them?

[MrPT]

Yes Colin, discussed, as in theory, clues in the title, conspiracy THEORY, zero facts.

Where do you stand on the amount of psychopaths needed for this, no one will answer me.....I wonder why......

Putting me on the spot eh John its a difficult one I admit. What I can not accept currently is that all 3 towers collapsed at free-fall speed - 2 due to plane collisions and one that wasn't even hit. The Professional achitects and design engineers are stacking up in their hundreds on the side that says no plane collision could possibly have caused the collapses and certainly not in the manner they fell.

The report I put on page 5 is perfectly logical Colin, and for every engineer saying no, there are ones saying yes. Have any of them ever had experience of this scenario before? No, it’s unprecedented. And anyone with common sense cannot believe the amount of nutters needed to do this could be found, i’ll hang my hat on the peg and say it would be impossible. Think about it.

Come on John, it’s much more likely that at a time when the entire world’s media was watching, a building that had been burning for hours and had essentially been gutted by fire from the inside-out, was demolished by a massive, conspiratorial plot instead of falling down.

I agree that a lot of things don’t add up, and that there has been some manipulation of the facts. Probably also some mishandling or fabrication of key artefacts. I can’t imagine something like this happening and that not being the case though.

[PerryGunn]

What I can not accept currently is that all 3 towers collapsed at free-fall speed - 2 due to plane collisions and one that wasn't even hit. The Professional achitects and design engineers are stacking up in their hundreds on the side that says no plane collision could possibly have caused the collapses and certainly not in the manner they fell.

I've stayed out of this but feel that I have to correct this piece of misinformation that keeps being repeated, they did not collapse at free-fall speed - it was 40-50% longer than free fall

There's a good paper on the mechanics of the collapse that was published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/peopl ... e%20It.pdf

This diagram is taken from the paper and shows the difference between free-fall timing and the reality of the collapse

WTC-Fig8.jpg (64.85 KiB) Viewed 1218 times

The paper also explains why the buildings collapsed (virtually) into their own footprint rather than toppling sideways...


...but, of course, those people that like to think of it as a conspiracy won't accept anything as mundane as a peer-reviewed paper written by experts in their field...

[mj2k]

Damn you and your facts Perry

Hope all is well mate.

[john-e89]

Putting me on the spot eh John its a difficult one I admit. What I can not accept currently is that all 3 towers collapsed at free-fall speed - 2 due to plane collisions and one that wasn't even hit. The Professional achitects and design engineers are stacking up in their hundreds on the side that says no plane collision could possibly have caused the collapses and certainly not in the manner they fell.

The report I put on page 5 is perfectly logical Colin, and for every engineer saying no, there are ones saying yes. Have any of them ever had experience of this scenario before? No, it’s unprecedented. And anyone with common sense cannot believe the amount of nutters needed to do this could be found, i’ll hang my hat on the peg and say it would be impossible. Think about it.

Come on John, it’s much more likely that at a time when the entire world’s media was watching, a building that had been burning for hours and had essentially been gutted by fire from the inside-out, was demolished by a massive, conspiratorial plot instead of falling down.

I agree that a lot of things don’t add up, and that there has been some manipulation of the facts. Probably also some mishandling or fabrication of key artefacts. I can’t imagine something like this happening and that not being the case though.

Can you imagine the sheer bewilderment and panic of such an event, I bet they’ve been running around like chickens with no heads, saying this, saying that, when nobody has had any experience of an event like this before.

But you don’t need to listen to any of it, once you listen to others expressing an opinion you’re lost, all you need to do is listen to your own mind and ask yourself one question: Do you believe the amount of people needed are capable of mass murder? That’s it, everything else is irrelevant because it’s an opinion. Once you’ve answered that you can get to point B, or realise the conspiracy are theories based solely on others wanting to distort your common sense.

[thanatu55]

Love how this is still going on

You guys (including me) will never agree. This is one that will never be put to bed.

[john-e89]

Love how this is still going on

You guys (including me) will never agree. This is one that will never be put to bed.

Where do you stand on the mass murder job application point thanatu?

[TitanTim]

What I can not accept currently is that all 3 towers collapsed at free-fall speed - 2 due to plane collisions and one that wasn't even hit. The Professional achitects and design engineers are stacking up in their hundreds on the side that says no plane collision could possibly have caused the collapses and certainly not in the manner they fell.

I've stayed out of this but feel that I have to correct this piece of misinformation that keeps being repeated, they did not collapse at free-fall speed - it was 40-50% longer than free fall

There's a good paper on the mechanics of the collapse that was published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/peopl ... e%20It.pdf

This diagram is taken from the paper and shows the difference between free-fall timing and the reality of the collapse
WTC-Fig8.jpg

The paper also explains why the buildings collapsed (virtually) into their own footprint rather than toppling sideways...


...but, of course, those people that like to think of it as a conspiracy won't accept anything as mundane as a peer-reviewed paper written by experts in their field...

Freefall or not, the towers collapsed in around 10 seconds so it may as well been freefall give or take a few seconds, there is no way on gods earth that was down to one plane crash and subsequent fire, its been proven time and again there was not enough topend mass to pulverise the lower levels at the speed it occured. The towers had been designed to withstand multiple jet airliner strikes and proven if one side had been peeled away the structural integrity would still have been intact due to the central core design. The only plausible answer is the towers were blown up, why who knows. I always thought it was strange how many FBI were on site imediately after the event started some who were proven to be explosive experts and strangely kitted out for such an event. Theres plenty of testements from firemen hearing multiple explosions as the towers were collapsing.

If you look at the Grenfell tower and how that burned at far higher temps than the Twin Towers and remained standing. The fires temps in the twin towers after the initial jet fuel had burnt off were quite low as all that was burning was office carpets and furniture etc, temps were certainly not at a 1000 degrees etc to melt steel beams etc. Its never been known for a highrise to collapse through fire alone.

Tim.

[TitanTim]

I go back to the original video I posted, the more you watch it the more the official story just doesn't make sense. I think the idea of what a minority really thinks who was behind it all is so unbelievable to most is why its dismissed as too incredible.

Tim.

Ok, put all the conspiracy theories to one side Tim, where do you stand on my argument about the amount of pschycopaths needed to carry out dropping the towers? Do you seriously believe there were that amount of them in the explosion trades and planning needed? In political circles? How do you go about finding suicidal pilots? Do you put an ad in the jobs section? Wanted....pilot to kill himself and 3000 others, apply the White House. Think about it, how would you find them? The secrecy needed in these mad people’s families? Not only that, no one, not one, has blabbed before it or since?

Go to the very basics, we all saw two planes hit, we all saw them drop from the top down, they did not drop from the ground, there were no explosions at the top of each tower, you would have seen them blowing out of each side. The structural collapse has been explained amongst the differing opinions.

I've no idea john, were the planes that hit the towers civilian or military? There was even talk that the calls from the planes were faked and that the planes were military. Problem is there's been so much conspiracy theories that the truth will never be known now. What you saw on that day happened but not in a way you think. For me the towers were blown up, no doubt about that, why and how is anyones guess.

Tim.

[john-e89]

I go back to the original video I posted, the more you watch it the more the official story just doesn't make sense. I think the idea of what a minority really thinks who was behind it all is so unbelievable to most is why its dismissed as too incredible.

Tim.

Ok, put all the conspiracy theories to one side Tim, where do you stand on my argument about the amount of pschycopaths needed to carry out dropping the towers? Do you seriously believe there were that amount of them in the explosion trades and planning needed? In political circles? How do you go about finding suicidal pilots? Do you put an ad in the jobs section? Wanted....pilot to kill himself and 3000 others, apply the White House. Think about it, how would you find them? The secrecy needed in these mad people’s families? Not only that, no one, not one, has blabbed before it or since?

Go to the very basics, we all saw two planes hit, we all saw them drop from the top down, they did not drop from the ground, there were no explosions at the top of each tower, you would have seen them blowing out of each side. The structural collapse has been explained amongst the differing opinions.

I've no idea john, were the planes that hit the towers civilian or military? There was even talk that the calls from the planes were faked and that the planes were military. Problem is there's been so much conspiracy theories that the truth will never be known now. What you saw on that day happened but not in a way you think. For me the towers were blown up, no doubt about that, why and how is anyones guess.

Tim.

What difference does it make Tim? Military or not? It’s still mass murder. And you’re answering yourself, there are so many conspiracy theories, that’s the point, they’re theories, I cannot understand how rational thinking people are giving theories credibility when all you need to do is use common sense, the hell with theories, they are all someone else’s opinion, they mean absolutely nothing, they have zero fact. Saying you have no idea to mass murder then using your time to argue theories is completely beyond me.

Use common sense Tim.

[SeanConnor]

What I can not accept currently is that all 3 towers collapsed at free-fall speed - 2 due to plane collisions and one that wasn't even hit. The Professional achitects and design engineers are stacking up in their hundreds on the side that says no plane collision could possibly have caused the collapses and certainly not in the manner they fell.

I've stayed out of this but feel that I have to correct this piece of misinformation that keeps being repeated, they did not collapse at free-fall speed - it was 40-50% longer than free fall

There's a good paper on the mechanics of the collapse that was published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/peopl ... e%20It.pdf

This diagram is taken from the paper and shows the difference between free-fall timing and the reality of the collapse
WTC-Fig8.jpg

The paper also explains why the buildings collapsed (virtually) into their own footprint rather than toppling sideways...


...but, of course, those people that like to think of it as a conspiracy won't accept anything as mundane as a peer-reviewed paper written by experts in their field...

Now don't start quoting hard science and things we can prove. Where would that ever lead us ? BTW did you know that there is a German bomber on the far side of the moon ? Oh no it vanished didn't it ? Oh and while I'm at it , any engineer who could not distinguish between temperature and heat would have failed rudimentary thermodynamics . This is an absolutely fundamental principle.

[PerryGunn]

Freefall or not, the towers collapsed in around 10 seconds so it may as well been freefall give or take a few seconds

That statement is a prime example of why arguing with conspiracy theorists is a waste of time, facts are ignored or twisted to support their views...

...so I won't bother visiting you in cloud-cuckoo land again...

[TitanTim]

Ok, put all the conspiracy theories to one side Tim, where do you stand on my argument about the amount of pschycopaths needed to carry out dropping the towers? Do you seriously believe there were that amount of them in the explosion trades and planning needed? In political circles? How do you go about finding suicidal pilots? Do you put an ad in the jobs section? Wanted....pilot to kill himself and 3000 others, apply the White House. Think about it, how would you find them? The secrecy needed in these mad people’s families? Not only that, no one, not one, has blabbed before it or since?

Go to the very basics, we all saw two planes hit, we all saw them drop from the top down, they did not drop from the ground, there were no explosions at the top of each tower, you would have seen them blowing out of each side. The structural collapse has been explained amongst the differing opinions.

I've no idea john, were the planes that hit the towers civilian or military? There was even talk that the calls from the planes were faked and that the planes were military. Problem is there's been so much conspiracy theories that the truth will never be known now. What you saw on that day happened but not in a way you think. For me the towers were blown up, no doubt about that, why and how is anyones guess.

Tim.

What difference does it make Tim? Military or not? It’s still mass murder. And you’re answering yourself, there are so many conspiracy theories, that’s the point, they’re theories, I cannot understand how rational thinking people are giving theories credibility when all you need to do is use common sense, the hell with theories, they are all someone else’s opinion, they mean absolutely nothing, they have zero fact. Saying you have no idea to mass murder then using your time to argue theories is completely beyond me.

Use common sense Tim.

I agree john, but common sense to me disregarding all the theories, etc is you have two immensly strong towers, built to withstand an airliner hitting it, remembering that a plane is basically an aluminium tube and of no real consequence considering what it was hitting. Common sense tells me that alone wouldn't have destroyed the towers completely and in exactly the same way. I've no idea if the towers were blown up but I don't believe they were destroyed by the planes alone. I find it fascinating, especially when you consider what little was left of them. Realistically what should have happened is the fires would have continued and burnt themselves out or at the worst the top floors only would have collapsed and the towers would have remained standing, but of course its history now.

Tim.

[PerryGunn]

Oh and while I'm at it , any engineer who could not distinguish between temperature and heat would have failed rudimentary thermodynamics . This is an absolutely fundamental principle.

Yep, there's a lot more 'heat' in a pint of boiling water than a red-hot needle...

The fires didn't have to burn hot enough to melt steel just long enough to heat-soak the steel and raise it's temperature high enough to lose structural integrity - strength loss of about 50% at 1100F, the beams try to expand, both ends are fixed so they buckle in the middle...

[john-e89]

It’s an aluminium tube with 90,000 litres of fuel on board, I’d imagine that has some bearing on things.....

It is so staggeringly simple what happened and yet people fall for all the voodoo bullshit..