- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 9/11 Truthers
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:29 pm to LSURYAN
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:29 pm to LSURYAN
quote:
thats what im saying...there are so many things that dont make sense, just that warrants another investigation....
even if there was another investigation, if the conclusions were not the same as your own, you would still be screaming "government conspiracy." Even if an outside party, like Popular Mechanics, investigated and came up with a conclusion that negated your, then that outside party must be a patsy for the Bush Administration right?
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:29 pm to Pax Regis
quote:
Oh ok, the gubment arranged for the assassination of the hundreds of people that were supposed to be on those flights in such a way that none of their families (some thousands of people) would not question that they got on those planes that hit the towers.
3 college degrees = gubment??
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:29 pm to LSURYAN
quote:
3 college degrees = gubment??
I'm making fun of you. Get it?
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:30 pm to Pax Regis
quote:
I'm making fun of you. Get it?
Ryan has made it abundantly clear that he doesnt "Get it."
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:33 pm to boxcarbarney
You know what is really sad is that I might have some small chance of actually voting for Ron Paul considering the rest of the candidates range from repulsive to lying shitbag for me. But then I see these nutjobs and think I must have made a grave error in judgment.
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:34 pm to boxcarbarney
quote:
Ryan has made it abundantly clear that he doesnt "Get it."
like i said, give me an explanation on the 47 core columns, molten metal and the beams getting cut at perfect angles....all i see is insults
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:39 pm to Pax Regis
quote:
You know what is really sad is that I might have some small chance of actually voting for Ron Paul considering the rest of the candidates range from repulsive to lying shitbag for me. But then I see these nutjobs and think I must have made a grave error in judgment.
BINGO!
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:40 pm to LSURYAN
quote:
like i said, give me an explanation on the 47 core columns, molten metal and the beams getting cut at perfect angles....all i see is insults
I'm not an engineer and can't even begin to do a forensic analysis of the remnants of WTC towers so you demand the impossible.
But it stands to reason that some beams on the lower levels of the WTC would have escaped unharmed. There are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of beams in those things. Some will make it out in good shape.
However, I do know people, and there is NO DAMN WAY a conspiracy of the magnitude necessary to pull off the tripe you people believe in is even remotely possible. It makes the Kennedy Assassination look like a home burglary.
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:44 pm to Pax Regis
quote:
I'm not an engineer and can't even begin to do a forensic analysis of the remnants of WTC towers so you demand the impossible.
you dont have to be an engineer to realize that the 47 core columns should have remained standing if the governments story was true
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:45 pm to LSURYAN
quote:
you dont have to be an engineer to realize that the 47 core columns should have remained standing if the governments story was true
Ok, then, explain it to me. I'm all ears.
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:46 pm to LSURYAN
would it matter?
any expalantion given will be countered by "watch the video!"
and you give no expalantion of how one of the largest buildings in the world, in the middle of the nations biggest city, that is open 24 hours a day, in the worlds largest media center, with cameras galore, be wired to go down. despite that it takes weeks to get the smallest buildings wired for demolition, despite the MILES and MILES of wiring that would be necessary, the innumerable holes that would have to be drilled, the sheer manpower alone.
this in addition to the competley illogical need for it, since you would have to believe no one would care about the buildings unless they completely came down
and to think that the loss of the wtc's wasnt enough to push us over the edge, but building 7 was the key to it all, a building no one outside of nyc knew was even part of the complex
any expalantion given will be countered by "watch the video!"
and you give no expalantion of how one of the largest buildings in the world, in the middle of the nations biggest city, that is open 24 hours a day, in the worlds largest media center, with cameras galore, be wired to go down. despite that it takes weeks to get the smallest buildings wired for demolition, despite the MILES and MILES of wiring that would be necessary, the innumerable holes that would have to be drilled, the sheer manpower alone.
this in addition to the competley illogical need for it, since you would have to believe no one would care about the buildings unless they completely came down
and to think that the loss of the wtc's wasnt enough to push us over the edge, but building 7 was the key to it all, a building no one outside of nyc knew was even part of the complex
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:51 pm to LSURYAN
quote:
molten metal
LINK
LINK
11. Why do some photographs show a yellow stream of molten metal pouring down the side of WTC2 that NIST claims was aluminum from the crashed plane although aluminum burns with a white glow?
NIST reported (NCSTAR 1-5A) that just before 9:52 a.m., a bright spot appeared at the top of a window on the 80th floor of WTC 2, four windows removed from the east edge on the north face, followed by the flow of a glowing liquid. This flow lasted approximately four seconds before subsiding. Many such liquid flows were observed from near this location in the seven minutes leading up to the collapse of this tower. There is no evidence of similar molten liquid pouring out from another location in WTC 2 or from anywhere within WTC 1.
Photographs, and NIST simulations of the aircraft impact, show large piles of debris in the 80th and 81st floors of WTC 2 near the site where the glowing liquid eventually appeared. Much of this debris came from the aircraft itself and from the office furnishings that the aircraft pushed forward as it tunneled to this far end of the building. Large fires developed on these piles shortly after the aircraft impact and continued to burn in the area until the tower collapsed.
NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.
Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface.
That's all I could find for now. I'll get some more for you later.
Posted on 1/15/08 at 12:57 pm to boxcarbarney
First, he said, video showed a yellow, molten substance splashing off the side of the south Trade Tower about 50 minutes after an airplane hit it and a few minutes before it collapsed. Government investigators ruled out the possibility of melting steel being the source of the material because of the unlikelihood of steel melting. The investigators said the molten material must have been aluminum from the plane.
But, said Jones, molten aluminum is silvery. It never turns yellow. The substance observed in the videos "just isn't aluminum," he said. But, he said, thermite can cause steel to melt and become yellowish.
Second, he cited video pictures showing white ash rising from the south tower near the dripping, liquefied metal. When thermite burns, Jones said, it releases aluminum-oxide ash. The presence of both yellow-white molten iron and aluminum oxide ash "are signature characteristics of a thermite reaction," he said.
Another item of evidence, Jones said, is the fact that sulfur traces were found in structural steel recovered from the Trade Towers. Jones quoted the New York Times as saying sulfidization in the recovered steel was "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the (official) investigation." But, he said, sulfidization fits the theory that sulfur was combined with thermite to make the thermite burn even hotter than it ordinarily would.
Jones said a piece of building wreckage had a gray substance on the outside that at one point had obviously been a dripping molten metal or liquid. He said that after thermite turns steel or iron into a molten form, and the metal hardens, it is gray.
He added that pools of molten metal were found beneath both trade towers and the 47-story WTC 7. That fact, he said, was never discussed in official investigation reports.
But, said Jones, molten aluminum is silvery. It never turns yellow. The substance observed in the videos "just isn't aluminum," he said. But, he said, thermite can cause steel to melt and become yellowish.
Second, he cited video pictures showing white ash rising from the south tower near the dripping, liquefied metal. When thermite burns, Jones said, it releases aluminum-oxide ash. The presence of both yellow-white molten iron and aluminum oxide ash "are signature characteristics of a thermite reaction," he said.
Another item of evidence, Jones said, is the fact that sulfur traces were found in structural steel recovered from the Trade Towers. Jones quoted the New York Times as saying sulfidization in the recovered steel was "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the (official) investigation." But, he said, sulfidization fits the theory that sulfur was combined with thermite to make the thermite burn even hotter than it ordinarily would.
Jones said a piece of building wreckage had a gray substance on the outside that at one point had obviously been a dripping molten metal or liquid. He said that after thermite turns steel or iron into a molten form, and the metal hardens, it is gray.
He added that pools of molten metal were found beneath both trade towers and the 47-story WTC 7. That fact, he said, was never discussed in official investigation reports.
Posted on 1/15/08 at 1:05 pm to LSURYAN
What those perfect angles on the beams tell me is that there was an intense amount of hit directed at that particular point on the beam. Not spread out in the case of a fire.
With the amount of weight on the beams, with high temperature heat, the beams would be severely warped.
With the amount of weight on the beams, with high temperature heat, the beams would be severely warped.
Posted on 1/15/08 at 1:35 pm to esjcats92
quote:
What those perfect angles on the beams tell me is that there was an intense amount of hit directed at that particular point on the beam. Not spread out in the case of a fire.
absolutely....
Posted on 1/15/08 at 8:16 pm to LSURYAN
quote:
nor the too-rapid-to-blame-it-all-on-gravity collapse times
just exactly what is your source for this "too-rapid-to-blame-it-all-on-gravity collapse"?
What exactly is "too rapid"?
quote:
straight down onto itself is NOT the path of least resistance
Exactly what do you not understand about gravity?
quote:
....the top should have toppled over due to the plane hitting the corner
Do you have any idea about angular momentum?
This post was edited on 1/15/08 at 8:20 pm
Posted on 1/15/08 at 8:21 pm to WampusCat56
This whole thread. Posted on 1/15/08 at 8:34 pm to LSURYAN
quote:
no way those beams are cut at an angle like that....
quote:
the beams being cut at perfect angles
except maybe if they were cut after the collapse in the clean-up effort?
DO you have an example of a beam that was "cut at an angle" as a result of the collapse??
If NOT - then please apologize to the board for being such a dumb a-hole.
This post was edited on 1/15/08 at 8:38 pm
Posted on 1/15/08 at 9:01 pm to WampusCat56
quote:
Exactly what do you not understand about gravity?
if a failure had occurred at that moment, it would have been at the point of highest levered stress, near the base of the tower, and the tower would have fallen over like a giant tree in a forest windstorm. That, of course, did not happen. Fires do not destroy skyscrapers. Never in the history of steel frame structures has a single one been destroyed by fire.According to the law of gravity, it is possible to calculate the time it takes for an object to fall a given distance. The equation is H=(1/2)at2, where H is the height, a is the acceleration of gravity (10 meters per second squared) and t is time in seconds. Plug in the height of the building at 1350 feet (411 meters) and we get 9 seconds. That is just about the length of time it took for the very top of the World Trade Center to fall to the street below. According to all reports, the whole thing was over in just about ten seconds.As if the entire solid structure below, the strong part which had not been burned or sliced or harmed in any significant way, just disappeared into nothingness. Gravitational acceleration CANNOT achieve its full effect if it is fighting any opposing force. In the case of the World Trade Center, the intact building below should have at least braked the fall of the upper stories. This did not happen. There was no measurable friction at all.
Let's suppose your government isnt lying to you. Let's suppose the structure were sufficiently weakened that it did fail catastrophically near the point of the airplane strike. In this case, the intact structure below would exert an upward force on the base of the upper story portion of the building (the part that has been broken loose), while any asymmetry would allow the force of gravity to work uninhibited on the tip of the skyscraper. Thus, the top section of the skyscraper would tip and fall sideways.
as for this:
quote:
If NOT - then please apologize to the board for being such a dumb a-hole.
frick off
This post was edited on 1/15/08 at 9:02 pm
Posted on 1/15/08 at 9:03 pm to LSURYAN
I propose a 9/11 Truthers board or moving these posts to the movie/tv board because they are closer to movies than anything.
Page 7 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News