ISF Logo   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 6th October 2017, 11:24 AM   #41
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,016
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
IIRC wasn't the secret service housed in that building? So the story line would be the building was destroyed to destroy the records of the secret service involvement in the taking down WTC 1 and 2.
The SEC was. They had to rebuild cases from scratch because the evidence was destroyed in WTC 7 with no copies.
MicahJava 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 6th October 2017, 11:25 AM   #42
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,016
So are we all on board with the actual arguments brought up by the article I linked?
MicahJava 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 6th October 2017, 11:50 AM   #43
bknight
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The SEC was. They had to rebuild cases from scratch because the evidence was destroyed in WTC 7 with no copies.
It went deeper than that

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_...iracy_theories

Quote:
According to a statement reported by the BBC, Loose Change film producer Dylan Avery thinks the destruction of the building was suspicious because it housed some unusual tenants, including a clandestine CIA office on the 25th floor, an outpost of the U.S. Secret Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and New York City's emergency command center
This information would have to be checked out since it is taken from a CT, however it fits the scenario I described.
You CT's are so clever to think of possibilities.
bknight 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 6th October 2017, 12:00 PM   #44
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,398
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
So are we all on board with the actual arguments brought up by the article I linked?
Those "arguments" been completely exposed as patent nonsense, and rather than address this, you have moved the goalposts to discuss contradictory arguments (albeit still nonsense) like thermite.

So yes, we are all on board with the actual "arguments" brought up by the article you linked being sheer nonsense.
__________________
rent this space
The Big Dog is online now   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 6th October 2017, 01:31 PM   #45
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 24,791
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The SEC was. They had to rebuild cases from scratch because the evidence was destroyed in WTC 7 with no copies.
Where is the source for this? Which cases? Lucky for the SEC many wall street companies and firms associated with Wall Street, made sure they has secure backups and spread out their resources after the Bombing at the WTC.

Did you get this from watching the fictional Loose Change series too many time, thinking it was real? Big gullible, ocean gullible


What would it matter, how is this proof for CD, or other nonsense you might try to claim?

BiG, big BIG, - how does evidence you say was destroyed play in the CD inside job false flag fantasy plot based on "overwhelming evidence" that does not exist?
__________________
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen" - Albert Einstein
"... education as the means of developing our greatest abilities" - JFK
https://folding.stanford.edu/ fold with your computer - join team 13232

Last edited by beachnut; 6th October 2017 at 01:58 PM. Reason: had to put out the laundry,
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 6th October 2017, 02:05 PM   #46
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,842
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
IIRC wasn't the secret service housed in that building? So the story line would be the building was destroyed to destroy the records of the secret service involvement in the taking down WTC 1 and 2.
Or worse, as I once heard it suggested: the demolition of WTC7 was a message to the CIA from the conspirators, along the lines of "We know where you live."

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 6th October 2017, 02:06 PM   #47
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,842
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The SEC was. They had to rebuild cases from scratch because the evidence was destroyed in WTC 7 with no copies.
Evidence please.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 6th October 2017, 02:30 PM   #48
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
So are we all on board with the actual arguments brought up by the article I linked?
Yes. Ill informed nonsense imagined by deluded folks who think they hear "booms" where there are none.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 6th October 2017, 03:05 PM   #49
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,257
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The SEC was. They had to rebuild cases from scratch because the evidence was destroyed in WTC 7 with no copies.
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Evidence please.

Dave
I'd like to see this as well.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM 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 6th October 2017, 04:56 PM   #50
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,013
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
It went deeper than that

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_...iracy_theories



This information would have to be checked out since it is taken from a CT, however it fits the scenario I described.
You CT's are so clever to think of possibilities.
Yeah, so the CIA destroyed #7 because they had to hide something because everyone was obviously watching a field office, and the CIA have never been able to misplace important files and documents. I mean never ever.

7's main tenant was Solomon Smith Barney, a huge bank, a company with resources. Have you ever seen what happens when you cross a NYC bank? It's not pretty.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 6th October 2017, 04:59 PM   #51
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,013
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
So are we all on board with the actual arguments brought up by the article I linked?
Yes, and everyone who's posted has already destroyed every allegation in that article years ago.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 7th October 2017, 02:25 AM   #52
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,842
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
So are we all on board with the actual arguments brought up by the article I linked?
The actual arguments boil down to "OK, we can't find any actual evidence for explosives, but if we really squint and half-close one eye we can make one of the arguments against them look like it isn't there."

Dve
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 7th October 2017, 09:46 AM   #53
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 15,360
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
The actual arguments boil down to "OK, we can't find any actual evidence for explosives, but if we really squint and half-close one eye we can make one of the arguments against them look like it isn't there."

Dve
Whatever keeps the discussion trending away from it's obvious demise.
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
LSSBB 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 8th October 2017, 04:27 AM   #54
bknight
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
Yeah, so the CIA destroyed #7 because they had to hide something because everyone was obviously watching a field office, and the CIA have never been able to misplace important files and documents. I mean never ever.

7's main tenant was Solomon Smith Barney, a huge bank, a company with resources. Have you ever seen what happens when you cross a NYC bank? It's not pretty.
Yes Smith Barney was the min tenant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...d_Trade_Center
Along with SEC, Secret Service, and American Express. I'm not sure where the CIA cover was, nor will I look for such references if they ever existed.

As you eluded to but didn't elaborate, it would be fool hardy to believe that no duplicate governmental (Secret Service, possible CIA, ) records didn't exist elsewhere.
bknight 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 8th October 2017, 07:21 AM   #55
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,016
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Evidence please.

Dave
What, you've never known that important files were lost forever in WTC 7?

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WR...ents_lost.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20011201...9/091701e.html

https://web.archive.org/web/20060701...t_Service.html
MicahJava 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 8th October 2017, 07:29 AM   #56
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,398
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Yeah, that really took the wind out of the sails of the Enron investigation!
__________________
rent this space
The Big Dog is online now   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 8th October 2017, 08:07 AM   #57
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,842
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What, you've never known that important files were lost forever in WTC 7?

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WR...ents_lost.html
A bunch of people outside the SEC claiming that the SEC probably lost documents;

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The SEC pointing out that, in fact, no active investigations would be lost as a result of the information lost with WTC7, that some information had to be reconstructed from its sources, but not that "whole cases had to be reconstructed from scratch". In fact, it specifically contradicts your statement.

Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
And a piece saying how the Secret Service lost some evidence and equipment but was back up and running within 48 hours of the collapse.

So, to summarise, some information was lost, most of it could be recovered, and no "whole cases had to be reconstituted from scratch." As usual, you've drastically over-stated the scale of the problem.

Except, I suppose, for the documents detailing the plans of the conspiracy to demolish the Twin Towers, which was the sole set of information that was really efficiently destroyed in the collapse.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 8th October 2017 at 08:08 AM.
Dave Rogers is online now   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 8th October 2017, 08:31 AM   #58
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,842
Well, we've seen a classic example of the conspiracist technique of obscuring and evading the issue there:

(1) Make a false and largely irrelevant claim.
("Whole cases" did not have to be rebuilt from scratch; even if they had, it's irrelevant to the question of whether explosives initiated the collapses of the Twin Towers.)
(2) When asked for evidence of the specific claim, pretend the person asking has never heard of claims in the same general subject area, so as to give the appearance that you know more than they do.
(We've all heard of the claim that "whole cases had to be rebuilt," and know that the evidence doesn't support it.)
(3) Then present evidence that supports something similar to, but different from, the actual claim and pretend you've scored a point.
(Yes, documents were destroyed, and some of them may not have been able to recover. That wasn't the claim you made.)

Congratulations, MJ, you've got the time-wasting tactics down to a T. I'd recommend which tactics you should concentrate on next, but actually those are the only ones required for a conspiracy theorist.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 8th October 2017, 08:47 AM   #59
bknight
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
A bunch of people outside the SEC claiming that the SEC probably lost documents;



The SEC pointing out that, in fact, no active investigations would be lost as a result of the information lost with WTC7, that some information had to be reconstructed from its sources, but not that "whole cases had to be reconstructed from scratch". In fact, it specifically contradicts your statement.



And a piece saying how the Secret Service lost some evidence and equipment but was back up and running within 48 hours of the collapse.

So, to summarise, some information was lost, most of it could be recovered, and no "whole cases had to be reconstituted from scratch." As usual, you've drastically over-stated the scale of the problem.

Except, I suppose, for the documents detailing the plans of the conspiracy to demolish the Twin Towers, which was the sole set of information that was really efficiently destroyed in the collapse.

Dave
If only MJ would have read all the links he provided, my take on all of them was pretty much what you got out of them. So all in all in was an inconvenience not a total loss, except of course the information concerning the government conspiracy on how the complex was to be taken down by a few individuals linked to Osama and directed by Khalid.
Ah the irony of the situation.
bknight 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 8th October 2017, 12:05 PM   #60
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,013
Originally Posted by bknight View Post
Yes Smith Barney was the min tenant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...d_Trade_Center
Along with SEC, Secret Service, and American Express. I'm not sure where the CIA cover was, nor will I look for such references if they ever existed.

As you eluded to but didn't elaborate, it would be fool hardy to believe that no duplicate governmental (Secret Service, possible CIA, ) records didn't exist elsewhere.
The most recent example of the CIA making incriminating data vanish is the destruction of the torture videos. The agent in charge just did it on his own, and while there was a lot of yelling and posturing in the end nothing happened.

My point was that this guy didn't destroy a building or fake a fire to do it.

And what have the Manning and Snowden leaks showed us as far as what information is just lying around in random files, and database storage that's been forgotten about.
The only materials lost in 9-11 would be paper (hand written notes, photographs w/negatives, microfilm, etc), and those are things one can stick in a briefcase to take somewhere and burn without having to flatten a building in the middle of a terrorist attack.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 8th October 2017, 03:55 PM   #61
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
...
The only materials lost in 9-11 would be paper (hand written notes, photographs w/negatives, microfilm, etc), and those are things one can stick in a briefcase to take somewhere and burn without having to flatten a building in the middle of a terrorist attack.
In fact, entire companies make a living out of offering just that service: To dispose completely and reliably of classified documents. Typically, customers are charged by the ton.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 8th October 2017, 09:34 PM   #62
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,238
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post

Wouldn't it be far better to simply shred and burn documents or remove and destroy computer hard drives rather than blowing up a whole building in order to hide evidence?!

This is another example of many as to why the 9/11 Truth movement is considered a laughing stock.
skyeagle409 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 October 2017, 01:54 AM   #63
Cosmic Yak
Graduate Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 1,785
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
Wouldn't it be far better to simply shred and burn documents or remove and destroy computer hard drives rather than blowing up a whole building in order to hide evidence?!

This is another example of many as to why the 9/11 Truth movement is considered a laughing stock.
Especially as the streets were strewn with documents and paper ejected fom the buildings by the impacts. As anyone could have picked them up, surely this would make it more likely for these documents to be made public, rather than less?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak 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 October 2017, 02:32 AM   #64
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Especially as the streets were strewn with documents and paper ejected fom the buildings by the impacts. As anyone could have picked them up, surely this would make it more likely for these documents to be made public, rather than less?
You fool! Our Overlords speak and write in dark, coded language, such that it is impossible to make any sense of it until every last bit of classified information has been released for Truthers to pore over and dig up the evil underneath it all!
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 October 2017, 02:41 AM   #65
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,842
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
You fool! Our Overlords speak and write in dark, coded language, such that it is impossible to make any sense of it until every last bit of classified information has been released for Truthers to pore over and dig up the evil underneath it all!
After reading the Laundry novels, I can fully believe that the SEC writes its documents in Old Enochian and is capable of invoking demons where necessary. In fact, if they got it wrong, it could easily result in the devastation of a large part of New York.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 October 2017, 09:19 AM   #66
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
Wouldn't it be far better to simply shred and burn documents or remove and destroy computer hard drives rather than blowing up a whole building in order to hide evidence?!
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
Especially as the streets were strewn with documents and paper ejected fom the buildings by the impacts. As anyone could have picked them up, surely this would make it more likely for these documents to be made public, rather than less?
This is a clue worthy of Scooby Doo. It's been staring us in the face.

Who would come up with a plan to destroy some documents by destroying the entire building housing them, and achieve that by destroying the even bigger buildings next to it by crashing airliners into them and expecting their burning wreckage to fall onto the smaller building?

Nobody.

Clearly the plan was that the tower 2 would topple onto tower 1 which would topple onto building 7 which would in turn fall on a small heap of birdseed in Barclay Street.

<triumphantly pulls rubber mask off the old caretaker, revealing Wile E Coyote>
Jack by the hedge 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 11th October 2017, 01:21 AM   #67
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,016
What exactly had to happen before the exterior started moving down for the noise to be structural failure?
MicahJava 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 11th October 2017, 01:25 AM   #68
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What exactly had to happen before the exterior started moving down for the noise to be structural failure?
Loaded question. You have not presented valid evidence that noise started before exterior started moving down.

And besides, there were no explosions, obviously.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 11th October 2017, 02:14 AM   #69
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,842
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What exactly had to happen before the exterior started moving down for the noise to be structural failure?
Earlier parts of the cascade failure that led to the exterior starting to move. In the case of WTC7 it's fairly obvious that this actually happened, because we know from observation that the core of the building started collapsing several seconds before any observed motion of the façade. Whether something similar happened in WTC2 is unknowable, but if it did it would be unremarkable.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is online now   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 11th October 2017, 10:08 AM   #70
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 7,255
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
You should read this:

Collapse or Explosion? A Discussion of the "Sounds of Explosions" Issue by Adam Taylor.

Also my suggestion: What if pre-positioned heating elements could weaken the steel very quickly before relatively small kicker charges are then used? You would need less explosive that way.
No. They cut several perimeter columns by crashing a plane through them, then weakened other structural elements by heating them with fire, started by jet fuel from the plane, and sustained by combustible materials in the building.
CORed 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 11th October 2017, 10:47 AM   #71
bknight
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Loaded question. You have not presented valid evidence that noise started before exterior started moving down.

And besides, there were no explosions, obviously.
No explosion prior to the interior falling either and no noise before the interior started to fail, just similar rumbling as with WTC1 and 2
bknight 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 11th October 2017, 11:48 AM   #72
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,238
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What exactly had to happen before the exterior started moving down for the noise to be structural failure?

WTC 7 began to buckle due to structural weakening, which was obvious when firefighters reported the creaking noises from within WTC 7. That was an indication that WTC 7 was in danger of collapsing and as a result, a decision was made to pull everyone away from WTC 7, a decision that saved many lives. And again, no explosions.
skyeagle409 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 11th October 2017, 10:24 PM   #73
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,013
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
WTC 7 began to buckle due to structural weakening, which was obvious when firefighters reported the creaking noises from within WTC 7. That was an indication that WTC 7 was in danger of collapsing and as a result, a decision was made to pull everyone away from WTC 7, a decision that saved many lives. And again, no explosions.
According to the oral FDNY history the collapse took 20 minutes. They heard/saw internal collapses, and were able to get everyone clear before it came down.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 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 12th October 2017, 12:06 AM   #74
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,317
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
You should read this:

Collapse or Explosion? A Discussion of the "Sounds of Explosions" Issue by Adam Taylor.

Also my suggestion: What if pre-positioned heating elements could weaken the steel very quickly before relatively small kicker charges are then used? You would need less explosive that way
.

You don't know anything more about exord that you do about firearms, suppressors and marksmanship.

Whip out your google fu and do a search for the method that is used to safely dispose of secondary high explosives, outside of detonation..

Report back with your findings.

Since the op of this thread avoids answering questions that would tend to betray their total lack of knowledge of the subject matter, I'll cut to the chase:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/explosives/disposal.htm

Methods of disposal

‘Disposal of explosives’ means their destruction, or rendering them permanently explosively inert, or their safe and legal transfer to a competent person.

There is generally more than one way of destroying an explosive. The method used will depend on the nature of the explosive and its hazards, and the type and position of the disposal site.

There are five main methods for the safe disposal or destruction of explosives:

Functioning in the design mode*

Burning

Detonation

Dissolving or diluting by a solvent or chemical destruction (including bioremediation)

Sometimes a combination of methods can be used.

Sea dumping and burial are not suitable methods for disposal and are not generally considered as being safe ways to discard explosives, as they will not generally destroy the explosives or render them harmless.


The short version - high explosives burn without detonating. They don't need a fire source any hotter than a common match to ignite.

Any HE on the floors that were burning would have gone up in the conflagration. Any bana-bana-fo-fana therm*te material would have done likewise.

*Meaning that the materials or device was actually used for their intended purpose as opposed to being disposed of on an explosive range by detonation. The above guidelines do not apply to devices or materials of unknown design and/or materials - IED's and foreign ordnance or materials are best detonated in place by EOD whenever possible.
__________________
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." - Col. Jeff Cooper, U.S.M.C.

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong 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 12th October 2017, 05:52 AM   #75
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Somewhere between the central U.S. and Hades
Posts: 11,373
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
The short version - high explosives burn without detonating. They don't need a fire source any hotter than a common match to ignite.
Well.....some do. But the ones that don't burn explode with heat (usually primary charges rather than secondary), which kinda gives the same point.

Fire would either set them off and destroy them or burn and destroy them.
Hellbound 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 12th October 2017, 10:33 AM   #76
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,016
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
You don't know anything more about exord that you do about firearms, suppressors and marksmanship.

Whip out your google fu and do a search for the method that is used to safely dispose of secondary high explosives, outside of detonation..

Report back with your findings.

Since the op of this thread avoids answering questions that would tend to betray their total lack of knowledge of the subject matter, I'll cut to the chase:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/explosives/disposal.htm

Methods of disposal

‘Disposal of explosives’ means their destruction, or rendering them permanently explosively inert, or their safe and legal transfer to a competent person.

There is generally more than one way of destroying an explosive. The method used will depend on the nature of the explosive and its hazards, and the type and position of the disposal site.

There are five main methods for the safe disposal or destruction of explosives:

Functioning in the design mode*

Burning

Detonation

Dissolving or diluting by a solvent or chemical destruction (including bioremediation)

Sometimes a combination of methods can be used.

Sea dumping and burial are not suitable methods for disposal and are not generally considered as being safe ways to discard explosives, as they will not generally destroy the explosives or render them harmless.


The short version - high explosives burn without detonating. They don't need a fire source any hotter than a common match to ignite.

Any HE on the floors that were burning would have gone up in the conflagration. Any bana-bana-fo-fana therm*te material would have done likewise.

*Meaning that the materials or device was actually used for their intended purpose as opposed to being disposed of on an explosive range by detonation. The above guidelines do not apply to devices or materials of unknown design and/or materials - IED's and foreign ordnance or materials are best detonated in place by EOD whenever possible.
When a piece of disinfo emerges among the more reasonable citizens who ask questions, it gets attacked like a parasite.
Edited by Agatha:  Edited to remove incivility

Last edited by Agatha; 14th October 2017 at 07:49 AM.
MicahJava 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 12th October 2017, 10:34 AM   #77
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,016
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
According to the oral FDNY history the collapse took 20 minutes. They heard/saw internal collapses, and were able to get everyone clear before it came down.
By that logic, the collapse took 6 hours.
MicahJava 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 12th October 2017, 10:36 AM   #78
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,016
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
WTC 7 began to buckle due to structural weakening, which was obvious when firefighters reported the creaking noises from within WTC 7. That was an indication that WTC 7 was in danger of collapsing and as a result, a decision was made to pull everyone away from WTC 7, a decision that saved many lives. And again, no explosions.
I've always wondered if you were a bot. Surely if you were a human you would know that this thread is about the South Tower.
MicahJava 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 12th October 2017, 10:40 AM   #79
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
By that logic, the collapse took 6 hours.
That is the first post of yours in this thread that makes actual sense and contains nothing that is wrong.

Congratulations!

ETA:
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I've always wondered if you were a bot. Surely if you were a human you would know that this thread is about the South Tower.
Hehe and this makes it two good posts in a row!
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

Last edited by Oystein; 12th October 2017 at 10:42 AM.
Oystein 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 12th October 2017, 10:48 AM   #80
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 14,859
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Why are official liars allowed to keep their memes? When a piece of disinfo emerges among the more reasonable citizens who ask questions, it gets attacked like a parasite. When liars like you spread ideas like "all explosives detonate when exposed to heat, and there is no way to protect explosives from heat", where's your sense of decency? Why spend time writing stuff you know is BS?
Have you heard of Danny Jowenko?
He was a Dutch entrepreneur, specializing in explosive demolition. In 2006, in an interview with a Dutch TV program, he came to the ad-hoc opinion, after seeing one silent video of WTC7, and before getting the information that Building 7 had suffered one of the worst building fires in history, that this was a "controlled demolition". Since then, many truthers, including AE911Truth, have adopted Jowenko as an expert witness for their cause.

In the very same video, Jowenko had expressed an opinion about "explosive demolition" at the twin towers: That this was "impossible".
Do you know the REASONS Jowenko, AE911Truth's expert witness for CD, gave for that assessment?
I give you a hint: It has to do with fires and what fires do to CD charges and their detonators and wiring.
Perhaps you can guess?
Will you call Jowenko a liar?
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein 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 08:17 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.