IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 9th January 2007, 02:07 PM   #1241
JonnyFive
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,459
Originally Posted by JimBenArm View Post
Well, JonnyFive wanted to see if we dropped a brick from 10 feet, what would happen, so we went out back to the shed, and...
I brained my damage, but now I know all about the WTC concrete/C4 core, how Bush did everything relating to 9/11, and how Osama Bin Laden is just a fun guy who loves puppies, kittens, and large quantities of uncut cocaine.
JonnyFive is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 02:36 PM   #1242
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,104
Originally Posted by Architect View Post
Hey! Where'd Ma Bricks Go?!
Isn't that what construction sites are for?
How else we gonna get stuff to 'spermint with and asplode thangs?
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 04:31 PM   #1243
juryjone
Refusing to be confused by facts
 
juryjone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 878
I've got to say, I'm fascinated by 28's thoughts (or lack thereof) of how the upper mass was supposed to have fallen outside of the lower mass.

Now, I can't animate, but I wanted to help 28 with a graphical representation of what the official line is versus what he seems to be thinking.

First of all, all of these examples are showing what would happen after the fulcrum (outer columns) fail. Someone earlier stated that that would occur with as little as a 3% bend. The fulcrum breaks, and the upper mass smashes straight downward, with all the resultant damage:




But 28 believes the tilt of the upper mass would continue rotating, forcing the upper mass clear of the lower mass. How would this happen? Perhaps it would slide off:




That not crazy enough for you? Perhaps it would flip off:



What everyone is trying to tell you, 28, is that there are no forces which would force the upper mass to go totally outside the lower mass. The entire force of the moving upper mass is brought to bear on the next floor below the damaged impact zone. That would fail, and so would all the other floors, hence a global collapse.

Here you go: pictures. Does that help in some small way?
__________________
"Humanity is slipping into the void of ignorance while you cheer and wave." - Tirdun, in reference to geggy and the 9/11 conspiracy theorists
juryjone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 04:34 PM   #1244
TjW
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,097
Originally Posted by JonnyFive View Post
Yes, we in the insurance business don't like to lose money very much. It's a very bad business model.

Of course, you can always lie about the value of something, but that is a crime, and we will do our damndest to run you into the ground for it.

On a claim the size of the towers, you better freaking believe that Zurich and the others had their best men and women on it.

Of course, if you assume that everyone is part of a monolithic conspiracy, anything is possible.
Of course, if the insurance company is in on the deal, why not just have them hand you the three billion, and not go to all the trouble and expense of blowing up your own buildings, while losing all recurring revenue?

I spose I'm not devious enough.
TjW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 04:44 PM   #1245
Bell
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21,050
Originally Posted by juryjone View Post
I've got to say, I'm fascinated by 28's thoughts (or lack thereof) of how the upper mass was supposed to have fallen outside of the lower mass.

Now, I can't animate, but I wanted to help 28 with a graphical representation of what the official line is versus what he seems to be thinking.

First of all, all of these examples are showing what would happen after the fulcrum (outer columns) fail. Someone earlier stated that that would occur with as little as a 3% bend. The fulcrum breaks, and the upper mass smashes straight downward, with all the resultant damage:

http://home.comcast.net/~jerry.jobe/WTC1.jpg


But 28 believes the tilt of the upper mass would continue rotating, forcing the upper mass clear of the lower mass. How would this happen? Perhaps it would slide off:

http://home.comcast.net/~jerry.jobe/WTC2.jpg


That not crazy enough for you? Perhaps it would flip off:

http://home.comcast.net/~jerry.jobe/WTC3.jpg

What everyone is trying to tell you, 28, is that there are no forces which would force the upper mass to go totally outside the lower mass. The entire force of the moving upper mass is brought to bear on the next floor below the damaged impact zone. That would fail, and so would all the other floors, hence a global collapse.

Here you go: pictures. Does that help in some small way?
Nominated.
Bell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 04:47 PM   #1246
uk_dave
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,154
Originally Posted by juryjone View Post
I've got to say, I'm fascinated by 28's thoughts (or lack thereof) of how the upper mass was supposed to have fallen outside of the lower mass.

Now, I can't animate, but I wanted to help 28 with a graphical representation of what the official line is versus what he seems to be thinking.

First of all, all of these examples are showing what would happen after the fulcrum (outer columns) fail. Someone earlier stated that that would occur with as little as a 3% bend. The fulcrum breaks, and the upper mass smashes straight downward, with all the resultant damage:

http://home.comcast.net/~jerry.jobe/WTC1.jpg


But 28 believes the tilt of the upper mass would continue rotating, forcing the upper mass clear of the lower mass. How would this happen? Perhaps it would slide off:

http://home.comcast.net/~jerry.jobe/WTC2.jpg


That not crazy enough for you? Perhaps it would flip off:

http://home.comcast.net/~jerry.jobe/WTC3.jpg

What everyone is trying to tell you, 28, is that there are no forces which would force the upper mass to go totally outside the lower mass. The entire force of the moving upper mass is brought to bear on the next floor below the damaged impact zone. That would fail, and so would all the other floors, hence a global collapse.

Here you go: pictures. Does that help in some small way?
Now do an episode of southpark

(Oh and brilliant post. No doubt 28th Kingdom will Lie and say that he didn't see it. Did I mention that 28th Kingdom is a LIAR?)
uk_dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 05:07 PM   #1247
Skibum
Graduate Poster
 
Skibum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,659
Originally Posted by juryjone View Post

Here you go: pictures. Does that help in some small way?

Excellent post.

An experiment one might perform to demonstrate the point would be to try and tip a refrigerator over. You've got to tilt it pretty far in order for it to tip over. If you don't tip it far enough and let it go its just going to fall back into the upright position.
Skibum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 06:31 PM   #1248
juryjone
Refusing to be confused by facts
 
juryjone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 878
Originally Posted by Bell View Post
Nominated.
Thank you very much, but the pictures are what tell the story here, not the language.

Something tells me that even a TLA winner would not be able to convince 28. (Right, uk_dave?)
__________________
"Humanity is slipping into the void of ignorance while you cheer and wave." - Tirdun, in reference to geggy and the 9/11 conspiracy theorists
juryjone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 07:44 PM   #1249
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29,390
Originally Posted by Skibum View Post
Excellent post.

An experiment one might perform to demonstrate the point would be to try and tip a refrigerator over. You've got to tilt it pretty far in order for it to tip over. If you don't tip it far enough and let it go its just going to fall back into the upright position.
And tipping a refrigerator - which is still mostly empty space - still takes a lot of effort. Which again emphasizes - where would that force come from? What could lift one side of the building up enough to "tip over"?

Nothing!




Okay, maybe Superman, but that's it!


And Super Dog.


And Mighty Mouse. But I'm sure that's it.


Except for Hercules.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 08:00 PM   #1250
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
ive proven a conspiracy!



ITS SO OBVIOUS!
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 08:59 PM   #1251
juryjone
Refusing to be confused by facts
 
juryjone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 878
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
ive proven a conspiracy!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...otxbe/WTC3.jpg

ITS SO OBVIOUS!
Dang! I thought I'd covered my tracks so well with a little bit of white-out.

And I would have, too, if it hadn't been for you meddling kids...
__________________
"Humanity is slipping into the void of ignorance while you cheer and wave." - Tirdun, in reference to geggy and the 9/11 conspiracy theorists
juryjone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 09:13 PM   #1252
Gravy
Downsitting Citizen
 
Gravy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 17,078
Aargh. I hate multiple choice.
2C ?
__________________
"Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard
Gravy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 09:46 PM   #1253
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,819
delete - duplicate

Last edited by LashL; 9th January 2007 at 09:51 PM.
LashL is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 09:47 PM   #1254
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,819
delete - duplicate



(or was it?)

Last edited by LashL; 9th January 2007 at 09:50 PM.
LashL is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 09:48 PM   #1255
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,819
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
ive proven a conspiracy!

<image omitted and sent to the NWO HQ for alteration and eventual destruction>

ITS SO OBVIOUS!
Ruh Roh. Now you've gone and done it, defaultdotxbe! No more NWO paycheques for you!

(and you're off the official winter solstice card mailing list, too)
LashL is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 10:06 PM   #1256
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
 
332nd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,278
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
And tipping a refrigerator - which is still mostly empty space - still takes a lot of effort. Which again emphasizes - where would that force come from? What could lift one side of the building up enough to "tip over"?

Nothing!




Okay, maybe Superman, but that's it!


And Super Dog.


And Mighty Mouse. But I'm sure that's it.


Except for Hercules.
Um.... Krypto. Left brainer
__________________
The poster formerly known as Redtail
332nd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 10:08 PM   #1257
juryjone
Refusing to be confused by facts
 
juryjone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 878
Ooh, wait, I forgot this one:

Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
I guessed you missed my video that showed the towers completely fell in approx. 11 seconds, 14 at the most...but I'm pretty sure that impact at 14 seconds was the upper mass hitting about 3 seconds after the lower floors reached the ground.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAKzhlOdB-I
So is this video a Looney Tunes cartoon? Because I imagine the lower floors falling away, followed 3 seconds later by the upper floors. This gives the upper floors plenty of time to do a double take and extend a small sign reading "OH NO!".
__________________
"Humanity is slipping into the void of ignorance while you cheer and wave." - Tirdun, in reference to geggy and the 9/11 conspiracy theorists
juryjone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 10:32 PM   #1258
28th Kingdom
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Jury Jone...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_of_least_resistance

Don't you think that the upper mass' momentum coupled with inertia and the fact that below it is a rock solid 70+ floors of undamaged building with 47 core columns, floors and steel outer columns... would propel it off to the side of the building (where there is no resistance) instead of down and through a structure which had the ability to support (massive resistance) the weight of the upper mass?

It's not the weight of the upper mass that crushed the lower floors all the way to the ground... it was the energy released by the 50 foot? fall that generated so much force that it smashed through almost 10 floors per second all the way to the ground. Note: And why were all four sides of the build exploding so symmetrically... in such a chaotic event i.e. tilting upper mass, scattered rubble... would the energy be so perfectly distributed throughout the entire collapse?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAKzhlOdB-I

Also, if you tried to visualize this growing upper mass, whose increasing size supposedly increased the speed of collapse... you wouldn't come up with a single object i.e. the upper floors melded together with the collapsing lowers floors... wouldn't it be more like the upper mass, and then millions of pieces of individual rubble caused by the collision between the upper mass and the lower floors? You all talk like this increasing mass was the upper floors literally fusing together with the lower floors as the collapse progressed. See: this is why it's important to visualize things... as it helps you understand the relation between your theories and a real world environment.

Also, your illustrations...omit one key component... and that is the 37 non-severed core columns that were still running from the base of the building through the impact floors (that big white gap - BTW did you borrow these pics from the 9/11 commission report) and up to the roof.

How did all of these columns manage to simultaneously break in a split second? How can three (sides) outer columns significantly affect the balance of the core columns in such a short span of time? I can see if the building was hollow... if that were the case, than obviously the three sides failing would of caused the imbalance required for the upper floors to tilt over... but, it all comes back to those core columns... and how they actually failed. This is an event that still doesn't have any logical explanation.

If you are gonna reply... please don't interject some really abstract term like, transferring of loads... which is so broad... that you could use it to explain away almost any event and/or phenomenon.

Yea, the WTC 1 & 2 fell because of the way the upper mass' latent energy penetrated the towers' terminal resistance threshold. Are you that dumb... please go read a book and learn something.

Last edited by 28th Kingdom; 9th January 2007 at 10:47 PM.
28th Kingdom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 10:38 PM   #1259
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Quote:
Wouldn't you think that the upper mass' momentum coupled with inertia and the fact that below it is a rock solid 70+ floors of undamaged building with 47 core columns, floors and steel outer columns... propel it off to the side of the building (where there is no resistance) instead of down and through a structure which had the ability to support (massive resistance) the weight of the upper mass?
so what lateral force would be propelling it off the side of the building? did god decide to reach down and give it a whack?
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 10:53 PM   #1260
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
essentially the towers WERE hollow. The connection between the core and the perimeter was just bar joists and the slab. A very economical and lightweight structure that was very unique. if you were to separate a single bar joist and set it aside a pair of 210LB construction workers could just about dead lift it one at each end. The lighter and more efficient you make the structure the less dead load you have to support, hence less steel again.

you might recall that the Joists were described as "Composite" Do you know what that means?

what it means is the concrete slab poured into and around the knuckles and top chord of the truss acted as a compression member for the truss lessening the requirement for a compression resistant and heavier cross section of steel in the top chord of the truss
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 10:55 PM   #1261
28th Kingdom
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
so what lateral force would be propelling it off the side of the building? did god decide to reach down and give it a whack?
I have the same question... what magical lateral force, caused the upper mass (supported by 37 non-severed vertical core columns) to tilt over?
28th Kingdom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 10:57 PM   #1262
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
I have the same question... what magical lateral force, caused the upper mass (supported by 37 non-severed vertical core columns) to tilt over?
jury's pic showed it pretty good



i just dont see why you expect it to go all the way all of the side
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:04 PM   #1263
28th Kingdom
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
jury's pic showed it pretty good

http://home.comcast.net/~jerry.jobe/WTC1.jpg

i just dont see why you expect it to go all the way all of the side
That pics shows it pretty good, yea? Cool... than maybe you can point out the 37 non-severed core columns for me.. because I'm having a hard time finding them.
28th Kingdom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:07 PM   #1264
332nd
Penultimate Amazing
 
332nd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,278
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
That pics shows it pretty good, yea? Cool... than maybe you can point out the 37 non-severed core columns for me.. because I'm having a hard time finding them.
That's ok... I've been having a hard time hearing the "CD Charges" sine the theory came out.
__________________
The poster formerly known as Redtail
332nd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:11 PM   #1265
28th Kingdom
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Originally Posted by Redtail View Post
That's ok... I've been having a hard time hearing the "CD Charges" sine the theory came out.
That's okay... because all of the thousands of first hand accounts (including firefighters and policemen) of hearing explosions going off... has been debunked as exploding cans of hair spray.. the Towers were only a few miles from Jersey, weren't they?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnbpz9udYus

Last edited by 28th Kingdom; 9th January 2007 at 11:13 PM.
28th Kingdom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:13 PM   #1266
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
That's okay... because all of the thousands of first hand accounts (including firefighters and policemen) of explosions going off... has been debunked as exploding cans of hair spray.. the Towers were only a few miles from Jersey, weren't they?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnbpz9udYus
so if that was a demo charge going off in WTC7.....why didnt it start to fall at that moment?

piss poor excuse for a demolition if you ask me
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:17 PM   #1267
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,856
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
That pics shows it pretty good, yea? Cool... than maybe you can point out the 37 non-severed core columns for me.. because I'm having a hard time finding them.
Quote:
please don't interject some really abstract term like, transferring of loads
So once again 28th, you want a simple explaination that covers all the technical details but doesn't introduce any tricky concepts that you don't understand.

I keep wavering between thinking you don't really believe what you write, as you're effectively self-debunking with all your inconsistancies and refusal to accept or acknowledge any of the answers to your questions. Then I read some of your 'logic' and 'calculations' and think that maybe you really do believe everything you say.

I can't decide which is more disturbing.
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:22 PM   #1268
28th Kingdom
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
so if that was a demo charge going off in WTC7.....why didnt it start to fall at that moment?

piss poor excuse for a demolition if you ask me
You don't know much about CD, do you? Firstly, the Twin Towers weren't CD. They were rigged with explosives... but definitely not in the same way that you setup a CD... I mean, have you ever seen walls explode in a CD... the Twin Towers were rigged completely different than a CD... that's why the people who rigged them... didn't have to know jack about CD. All they had to know was how to rig a building to explode... and I'm sure the MOSSAD knew a little something about that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SL3zIv7LdZQ

Notice how things don't start collapsing at the first sounds of explosions.

Last edited by 28th Kingdom; 9th January 2007 at 11:25 PM.
28th Kingdom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:26 PM   #1269
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
You don't know much about CD, do you? Firstly, the Twin Towers weren't CD. They were rigged with explosives... but definitely not in the same way that you setup a CD... I mean, have you ever seen walls explode in a CD... the Twin Towers were rigged completely different than a CD... that's why the people who rigged the buildings... didn't have to know jack about CD. All they had to know was how to rig a building to explode... and I'm sure the MOSSAD knew a little something about that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SL3zIv7LdZQ

Notice how things don't start collapsing at the first sounds of explosions.
notice how the landmark tower has a little bit more than 1 explosion? notice how it begins collapsing after the explosions?

now lets go back to you WTC7 phonebooth vid, we have 1 explosion, and the tower doesnt seem to collapse right afterward (cant be sure becuase the video cuts out, truther ADD i suppose, cant stick with one vid for more than 30 seconds)
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:28 PM   #1270
28th Kingdom
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Originally Posted by Mashuna View Post
So once again 28th, you want a simple explaination that covers all the technical details but doesn't introduce any tricky concepts that you don't understand.

I keep wavering between thinking you don't really believe what you write, as you're effectively self-debunking with all your inconsistancies and refusal to accept or acknowledge any of the answers to your questions. Then I read some of your 'logic' and 'calculations' and think that maybe you really do believe everything you say.

I can't decide which is more disturbing.
I just want to know... if you have eliminated the possibility of explosions with scientific evidence or with mere speculation i.e. it's impossible to rig inhabited buildings with explosives.

Could speculation accepted as fact... be warping your calculations and/or theories?
28th Kingdom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:30 PM   #1271
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 25,965
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
You don't know much about CD, do you? Firstly, the Twin Towers weren't CD. They were rigged with explosives... but definitely not in the same way that you setup a CD... I mean, have you ever seen walls explode in a CD... the Twin Towers were rigged completely different than a CD... that's why the people who rigged them... didn't have to know jack about CD. All they had to know was how to rig a building to explode... and I'm sure the MOSSAD knew a little something about that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SL3zIv7LdZQ

Notice how things don't start collapsing at the first sounds of explosions.
This is why you do not understand this!!!

It is called knowledge;

Quote:
Today, 01:08 AM
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
I didn't say that... they're making this crap up.
Quote:
Last edited by 28th Kingdom : Today at 01:30 AM.


Quote:
Today, 01:09 AM
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
I was going off of freefall times that someone else came up with. According to this video, freefall for steel beams a certain size would be 4.7 seconds over the distance of 100 meters.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ml_n5gJgQ_U

So we divide 100 meters into the height of WTC 2 (415m) We get 4.15.

4.15 X 4.7 = 19.505 seconds.


Quote:
Today, 01:17 AM
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
I was going off of freefall times that someone else came up with. According to this video, freefall for flat steel beams would be 5.6 seconds over the distance of 100 meters.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ml_n5gJgQ_U

So we divide 100 meters into the height of WTC 2 (415m) We get 4.15.

4.15 X 5.6 = 23.24 seconds.


If you understood why you are wrong here you will start to see you are wrong all the time.

Then you go to school and you can be right. School!!!!
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:32 PM   #1272
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
I just want to know... if you have eliminated the possibility of explosions with scientific evidence or with mere speculation i.e. it's impossible to rig inhabited buildings with explosives.

Could speculation accepted as fact... be warping your calculations and/or theories?
you cant prove a negative, so we can never prove explosives werent in the WTC, but the same holds true for bigfoot and the loch ness monster, you cant prove they dont exist either

in this case, the burden is on you, you have to prove explosives were in the towers, and simply speculating as to the origin of a sound you hear is no more proof than a grainy pic of a submarine with a neck on it
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:34 PM   #1273
Minadin
Master Poster
 
Minadin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 2,469
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom
Could speculation accepted as fact... be warping your calculations and/or theories?
Not mine, I have to understand these things to make a living. You can my explaination here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...47#post2241047

(You seem to have missed it the first time)
Minadin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:35 PM   #1274
28th Kingdom
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
notice how the landmark tower has a little bit more than 1 explosion? notice how it begins collapsing after the explosions?

now lets go back to you WTC7 phonebooth vid, we have 1 explosion, and the tower doesnt seem to collapse right afterward (cant be sure becuase the video cuts out, truther ADD i suppose, cant stick with one vid for more than 30 seconds)
No, I noticed two explosions... not one - I guess you have limited hearing abilities... and also, do you think the building I linked to would have fallen if only two explosions went off?

Also...notice even in CD videos...how the buildings invariably crumple unevenly. WTC 7 fell so unbelievably symmetrical...it even defies CD:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A
28th Kingdom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:39 PM   #1275
defaultdotxbe
Drunken Shikigami
 
defaultdotxbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,474
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
No, I noticed two explosions... not one - I guess you have limited hearing abilities... and also, do you think the building I linked to would have fallen if only two explosions went off?
sounds more like an explosion and an echo to me

so what was the point of this blast? a loud noise to get everyones attention and look all suspicious before the actual demolition?

Quote:
Also...notice even in CD videos...how the buildings invariably crumple unevenly. WTC 7 fell so unbelievably symmetrical...it even defies CD:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A
so your saying it doesnt look like a CD?

i thought the whole of your evidence rested on its visual resemblence to a demolition? better not tell roxdog
__________________
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -Albert Einstein
defaultdotxbe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:44 PM   #1276
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,854
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_of_least_resistance

Don't you think that the upper mass' momentum coupled with inertia and the fact that below it is a rock solid 70+ floors of undamaged building with 47 core columns, floors and steel outer columns... would propel it off to the side of the building (where there is no resistance) instead of down and through a structure which had the ability to support (massive resistance) the weight of the upper mass?
The "path of least resistance" is an incremental thing, with the possible and sometime exception of superfluids. At all times the total energy gradient has to be negative. Ordinarily, the trajectory of an object cannot ever actually reach the true path of least resistance. In some cases, that path is not even an attractor.

Here's a dumb example. Let's say your house is on a small hill, with nothing around it. An 18-wheeler is heading straight for it at high speed. Will the 18-wheeler magically flow around your house, damaging nothing? That's the path of least resistance, right?

Wrong. The "resistance" also includes the energy needed to alter the truck's vector. It's actually harder for it to miss than it is to smack your house. Your insistence that the upper block would somehow slide to the side assumes that it would take no energy at all to slide the block 200 feet so that it could drop.

Guess what: Moving a 50 thousand ton block 200 feet sideways takes lots of energy. This has been explained to you at least ten times, including graphically. Aside from a puppet show, I don't know what else to try.

Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
Yea, the WTC 1 & 2 fell because of the way the upper mass' latent energy penetrated the towers' terminal resistance threshold. Are you that dumb... please go read a book and learn something.
Ah, so the proven liar and slanderer claims to be more knowledgeable than us, huh?

Let's test that theory:

Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
I have the same question... what magical lateral force, caused the upper mass (supported by 37 non-severed vertical core columns) to tilt over?
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
That's okay... because all of the thousands of first hand accounts (including firefighters and policemen) of hearing explosions going off... has been debunked as exploding cans of hair spray.. the Towers were only a few miles from Jersey, weren't they?
So let's suppose your idiotic observation was correct: It was explosives that shoved that 50 thousand ton block 200 feet to the side.

Suppose the block is blasted in a parabolic arc, moving 200 feet aside in roughly one second, but feel free to use whatever time you wish. Also suppose the explosives are 100% efficient in doing this (there's no way in the world they would -- explosives are really, really bad at moving solid objects -- but let's make this as easy as possible).

1. Numerical answer: How much explosives are needed? Show your work.
2. Essay answer: Is there a way to tell whether an explosive this size was detonated?

Let's see what you've got, since you've "read a book" and "learned something." I'll be glad to check your work, since I can calculate this standing on my head.

Last edited by R.Mackey; 9th January 2007 at 11:50 PM. Reason: Challenge is even simpler than I first thought. Go to it, ye who claims a 150 IQ.
R.Mackey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:46 PM   #1277
28th Kingdom
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe View Post
sounds more like an explosion and an echo to me

so what was the point of this blast? a loud noise to get everyones attention and look all suspicious before the actual demolition?



so your saying it doesnt look like a CD?

i thought the whole of your evidence rested on its visual resemblence to a demolition? better not tell roxdog
A tall building falling from the sky in seconds (WTC 7) is the part that resembles a CD.... because, we've never seen buildings do this outside of a CD. Not from hurricane damage, or earthquake damage... or plane damage... or fire damage... only from damage caused by planted explosives.
28th Kingdom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2007, 11:56 PM   #1278
28th Kingdom
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 947
Originally Posted by R.Mackey View Post
... explosives are really, really bad at moving solid objects ...
Before I reply to anything... please tell me what the hell you mean by this.
28th Kingdom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2007, 12:00 AM   #1279
Minadin
Master Poster
 
Minadin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 2,469
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom
because, we've never seen buildings do this outside of a CD.
Exactly . . . you have no other point of reference, nothing to base it on, which is why it looks like a CD to you. People who know more than you do about these things disagree with your grossly non-expert opinion; that should tell you something.
Minadin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2007, 12:01 AM   #1280
R.Mackey
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,854
Originally Posted by 28th Kingdom View Post
Before I reply to anything... please tell me what the hell you mean by this.
Explosives don't move large objects.

I work for NASA. Rockets are not explosives (unless something goes wrong). There's a reason for this.

If you detonate a pile of explosives next to a large object, what happens? The explosive creates a pressure front that washes over the object at supersonic speed. Even assuming the object survives the shock, it won't move much, because there's only a pressure differential for a millisecond or so -- and then the shock is gone, moved past the object. To move something requires energy, in the form of work, which is equal to power times time. The power is there, but not the time. So the explosives never do much work.

Not to mention, the explosive is pushing its energy out in all directions, not focused on the object itself. There are rarely things like pistons unless you build them that way.
R.Mackey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:30 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.