September 11, 2001

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Beyond that, the north tower had previously had a fire that burned vertically through some of the floors for 3 hours. Why would desks, draperies, etc., be able to burn for 3 hours on one occasion and not melt the steel, but less than 20 minutes in the next occasion?
.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Dhodges wrote:

Doesn't that still require some explanation? What was in the towers that burned at such a high temperature? Being an office building, you would expect it to have a lot of paper and wood, which does not burn that hot (451 degrees Fahrenheit, according to Ray Bradbury).

Earlier in the article, it states, “the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.”

If you read the rest of the article, you will find that many engineers have stated that explosives are not needed for a buildings to fall the way they did; the term they used is called ‘pancaking’ meaning that once one level collapses, the massive gravational pressure plus the immense heat causes the level below to collapse, and this causes a chain reaction.

Also it is common knowledge that the Al-queda organization proudly took responsibility for the attack after it occurred, not to mention that bin laden and his gang tried to blow up the WTC in the early 1990s, plus he attacked other US targets. And he stated in interviews many times that he was plotting an attack on US soil.

People that believe in conspiracies give humans way too much credit. The former president of the USA couldn’t even keep his sexual encounters a secret from his wife and the country, how do you expect a large group of people to pull off such a plot without someone credible coming forward?

The governments of most countries have proved themselves totally incompetent, disorganizated, and fragmented again and again. The type of cooperation needed to pull off a secretive operation sucessfully is highly unlikely for humans; generally humans dont keep secrets very well.

Another example: The US army knew exactly where Osama Bin Laden was, but they didnt send enough forces to Tora Bora, and after they bombed the area, they realized that he had escaped.

Seriously guys, this claim is right up there with alien encounters, the sasquatch and scientology.

[sschaula]

Good to see some more common sense here, Ryan.

Just because we know that steel doesn't burn until a certain temperature doesn't mean anything. There are many factors involved, most of which none of us here know about. Textbook answers rarely suffice for real world applications.

[Richard]

Also it is common knowledge that the Al-queda organization proudly took responsibility for the attack after it occurred

Not-so common knowledge that Osama bin Laden denied responsibility, and that the supposed confession tape found in Jalalabad on December 9, 2001 was fake.

"I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. ... The American system is totally in control of the Jews [Zionists], whose first priority is Israel, not the United States." - Osama bin Laden, September 16, 2001

[Ryan Rudolph]

Richard wrote:

Not-so common knowledge that Osama bin Laden denied responsibility, and that the supposed confession tape found in Jalalabad on December 9, 2001 was fake.

"I was not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. There exists a government within a government within the United States. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. ... The American system is totally in control of the Jews [Zionists], whose first priority is Israel, not the United States." - Osama bin Laden, September 16, 2001

For every historical fact, there are many of these odd theories floating around, and there is a high probability that they have no merit once so ever. This reminds to similar conspiracies that are centered around the Jewish halocaust of WWII; namely many Islamis extremists believe that the Halocaust didnt occur, and it is a conspiracy set up by the evil zionists.

But I suspect that all these type of ideas are incorrect. Moreover, whenever I hear someone talking passionately using the word Zionist, I tend to be rather skeptical of the claim.

[sschaula]

It'd be hard to find someone who looks like Bin Laden, to admit to the attacks, to tape it and what not, and to have no one open their mouths about their involvement in that. People that work in the government for the most part aren't the slick cold blooded type you see in the movies...they're generally patriotic and wouldn't deliberately make something like that. So I find it quite unbelieveable.

[Unidian]

Just an aside:

Jet fuel is largely irrelevant to 9/11, since NIST and FEMA both state that most of the jet fuel had burned off during the first 10 minutes. The official account clearly states that the ongoing fires which they claim led to the collapses were sustained by the combustion of normal office contents. The whole never-ending argument between 9/11 believers and skeptics surrounding jet fuel is mostly a red herring. No official theory of collapse maintains that burning jet fuel compromised or weakened the structural steel to any significant extent.

[Unidian]

Additionally, it's worth reiterating that no steel-frame skyscraper in the world has experienced total structural collapse due to fire before or after 9/11. On that single day, three supposedly did so. This remarkable statistical anomaly alone should strain credulity and set off loud alarm bells for any critical thinker. This should be considered when evaluating debunkers' appeals to the old sawhorse of "common sense." What does "common sense" say about an event previously considered virtually impossible occurring three times on the same day?

[sschaula]

Counting out WTC 7...the towers didn't fall merely due to fires. Airplanes crashed into them!

[Unidian]

Yes. However, neither of the official reports from FEMA or NIST maintain that the plane impacts played a crucial role in the collapses. They acknowledge that the towers were built to withstand such impacts and there was insufficient force to cause the kind of structural damage necessary to result in collapse. Both reports identify fire as the primary agent of structural damage, which is why the statistical argument is valid.

9/11 Reseach: Twin Towers Designed for Airliner Impact

[Tharan]

Where's Dan?

[Tharan]

Yes. However, neither of the official reports from FEMA or NIST maintain that the plane impacts played a crucial role in the collapses. They acknowledge that the towers were built to withstand such impacts and there was insufficient force to cause the kind of structural damage necessary to result in collapse. Both reports identify fire as the primary agent of structural damage, which is why the statistical argument is valid.

9/11 Reseach: Twin Towers Designed for Airliner Impact

The terrorists appeared to fly the planes into the towers, on the surface of things. But once you dig deeper, you begin to see the connections and the shadowy underpinnings and motives of the real global players. But when you dig just a little deeper, you surface, and realize...the terrorists did it.

[Tomas]

Where's Dan?

-the queers and steers (n'sync)

comment:

"where's Danny BoY
?





-tomas-\
[pfft] He's on doin;' what boys do...




Tomas (the tank)
Prince of Jerusalem
16 Degree
Scottish Rite


.

[Tomas]

Prince,

How is September 11, 2001 any different to other acts of violence that have recently happened? Why doesn’t the genocide in Darfur bother you to the same extent? Why have you been psychologically affected by this act alone?

Anything that is possible can happen. A terrorist attack on the world trade center is very tame compared to what is possible. I predict that some of these organizations will eventually get their hands on biological or chemical weapons that are capable of killing hundreds of thousands of people in densely populated areas.

The goal is not not allow the irrational acts of humans to affect one in an emotional sense. The big problem Prince is that you intrepret this as a personal attack agaisnt you. Moroever, you identity with the nation as a whole, and the members that run it. And then you label the terrorist group as them, and establish this divisive and conflicting duality in your psyche. However, you should not emotionally identity yourself with any group of humans at all, it is a form of tribalism. Members of the bush adminstration are just as ignorant as the Al-queda terrorist group, the two feed off each other.

Here is one way to view September 11: The terrorist’s irrational acts are intimately linked to the USA’s exploitative foreign policy that has been present in the middle-east for decades. Its not rational, but It's very understandable why an ignorant powerless force that lives in poverty will strike out against an ignorant powerful force that is very rich as a result.

Doofus write:

Bitch , the end is near !!






The duality plays off the other, and some degree of this type of irrational behavior will always exist in this world.


Doofus scribbles:

blah blah blah





So one needs to be emotionally ready for anything, anywhere, anytime, because anything that is possible could occur, there is nothing secure.

bel(and the dragon) scrawls zebubba


tomas (the tank)
vietnam veteran - 1971





.mamamam,amamam

[Unidian]

Dude.... drugs?

[Jason]

In the rubble of the twin towers, I read about the workers finding these pools of molten metal - still molten, weeks after the towers fell.

Maybe it was another metal, like aluminium, maybe from the plane or other parts/contents of the building. Is there any chance that the collapse itself could create enough friction or compression etc to heat steel above its melting point?

[DHodges]

If you read the rest of the article, you will find that many engineers have stated that explosives are not needed for a buildings to fall the way they did;

I'm not suggesting explosives; I am suggesting an incendiary device such as thermite.

from http://www.rense.com/general75/thrm.htm:

The FEMA-sponsored Building Performance Study of 2002 contains evidence of melted steel caused by sulfidation and oxidation. This is found in the "Limited Metallurgical Examination" written by Professor Jonathan Barnett. The NIST report, however, fails to address the evidence of sulfidation found in the structural steel from the WTC.

The sulfidation is evidence of something like thermite.

See also:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/ju ... alysis.htm
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/thermite.htm

the term they used is called ‘pancaking’ meaning that once one level collapses, the massive gravational pressure plus the immense heat causes the level below to collapse, and this causes a chain reaction.

I know the theory, and I've even seen it demonstrated on television. I don't buy it.

The core of the WTC towers was very strong; there was just an incredible amount of steel there. If the core was weakened at, say, the 81st floor, you still have this massive column of steel below, most of which could not have been weakened. The pancaking, if it occurred, should have happened around the core; the core itself should not have collapsed. The end result should be eighty stories of core left standing, surrounded by rubble. Or, possibly, due to the weakening, the top of the building might have twisted and bent over in one direction.

Instead, what you see is the entire building collapsing at near freefall, as if the core were suddenly removed. There is just no way to generate that much heat, to cause the entire core to fail as a unit, all at once - not from jet fuel, and not from ordinary office supplies. And of course you have the molten metal at the scene, still molten several weeks later.

This is purely an argument of the physics involved, and I don't think that, by itself, it supports any one theory of who was responsible over another.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Dhodges wrote:

The sulfidation is evidence of something like thermite.

I’ll have to research the termite theory, but the problem I have with it all is that planes have never crashed into skyscrapers before at such a magnitude, and scientists can only speculate because there were thousands of chemical compounds that mixed together from the building and the plane, and it is very difficult to know the myriad of affects they could have had. Steel is just steel. How is the metal formed? It is justed heated up and molded into the desired shape, so I remain skeptical of how durable the metal would be against such an occurance.

However, you have swayed me somewhat because I’m not dismissing the idea altogether, but it still seems highly unlikely to me. Another problem I have with the ‘inside job theory’ is that most Americans are much too nationalistic and patriotic to ever plot an attack on their own people. If it had been an inside job, surely a credible source would have come forward out of sheer guilt of what they had been a part of.

In my community, there have been a number of deaths related to drunk drivers, and the driver always turns himself in within the week because the guilt eats away at him. For your typical human being that deals with these sorts of emotions, keeping such a secret would be terribly difficult.

[Dan Rowden]

Where's Dan?

I'm over there in the corner, loading the ammo....

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Ryan, I knew before that you are not an American, but that statement about drunk drivers turning themselves in due to guilt makes it really obvious. Now keep in mind that New Yorkers are to Americans what Americans are to Australians.

My theory was that Silverstein and the mafia were working together on this with the Bush family directly (which explains the wiring and no leaks), and Bush probably got paid something, but mostly got the country off his tail (and his brother Jeb's tail - the governor of FL, the swing state with the ballot counting problem) about how he got elected President without winning the popular vote. Both George and Jeb got to keep their jobs without a major investigation into the voting problem because the country was too worried about terrorists to worry about that, and in times of crisis, a country will rally behind its President.

As for no leaks, if it was only the President, his brothers, Silverstein, and the mafia, there would be little chance of a leak (and the closest thing to a leak was Silverstein himself on the PBS show). The mafia is really good at keeping really quiet about stuff, and keeping other people quiet too. I understand they have a really stiff termination policy for any employee who has a hard time keeping his mouth shut, and other people who get a loose tongue suddenly get accident prone - you know?
.

[DHodges]

I’ll have to research the termite theory, but the problem I have with it all is that planes have never crashed into skyscrapers before at such a magnitude, and scientists can only speculate because there were thousands of chemical compounds that mixed together from the building and the plane, and it is very difficult to know the myriad of affects they could have had.

Well, yeah. It is very hard to know.

Especially when the steel in question is kept away from those scientists by armed guards, and shipped off to China for re-cycling.

For your typical human being that deals with these sorts of emotions, keeping such a secret would be terribly difficult.

We are not talking about such people. We are talking about people who have no problem with killing, or ordering people killed, for political and/or economic ends. There are such people in Afghanistan, in North Korea, all across Africa, and there are such people in the US. They have lived throughout history. Wars don't start without them.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Elizabeth wrote:

My theory was that Silverstein and the mafia were working together on this with the Bush family directly.

Come on Elizabeth, do you really think the Bush family is capable of this sort of thing? It almost laughable, were talking about the same guy right?

Dhodges wrote:

We are not talking about such people. We are talking about people who have no problem with killing, or ordering people killed, for political and/or economic ends. There are such people in Afghanistan, in North Korea, all across Africa, and there are such people in the US. They have lived throughout history. Wars don't start without them.

Yes, you have a point there.

Dan wrote:

I'm over there in the corner, loading the ammo....

Do you ever think there are circumstances when violence is justified? For instance: Do you think the nation of Britain was justified in defending against Hitler?

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

I liked the video Ryan. Yeah, I don't think he's have a problem with not talking about something. Actually, he seems to have the opposite problem. He seems like a yes man, so I don't think he came up with the idea - but that does not rule out his agreeing to it.
.

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

Hehe - here's proof that Bush can keep his mouth shut about advance knowledge of 9/11.
video

******************
edit Here's a video of the pentagon. I didn't think this had been released - can anyone tell if it has been doctored?
.

[Unidian]

The core of the WTC towers was very strong; there was just an incredible amount of steel there. If the core was weakened at, say, the 81st floor, you still have this massive column of steel below, most of which could not have been weakened. The pancaking, if it occurred, should have happened around the core; the core itself should not have collapsed. The end result should be eighty stories of core left standing, surrounded by rubble. Or, possibly, due to the weakening, the top of the building might have twisted and bent over in one direction.

Instead, what you see is the entire building collapsing at near freefall, as if the core were suddenly removed. There is just no way to generate that much heat, to cause the entire core to fail as a unit, all at once - not from jet fuel, and not from ordinary office supplies. And of course you have the molten metal at the scene, still molten several weeks later.

This is a strong argument that needs to be answered by proponents of the official version. Also, from a physics perspective, the disappearing angular momentum of the top 30 stories of the South Tower must be explained.

The deceleration of the top's rotation is even more discrediting to the idea of a gravity-driven collapse, which cannot explain the documented changes in angular momentum. Conservation of angular momentum is the tendency of a rotating solid object to continue rotating at the same rate in the absence of torque. Initially the block consisting of the top 30 stories of the tower acted as a solid object, and rotated about a fulcrum near the impact zone. Although the fulcrum was the axis of rotation, the block had two types of momentum: the angular momentum of the block around its center of gravity, and the linear momentum of its center of gravity tilting away from the tower's vertical axis. When the portion of the building below the collapse zone disintegrated, the block would preserve its angular momentum by continuing to rotate at the same rate (but the acceleration of the rotation would cease due to the removal of the torque that was being applied by intact columns at the fulcrum). But in reality, the rotation of the block rapidly decelerated as the downward plunge began. Once the fall started, any resistance it encountered from parts of the building would have imparted torque on the block in the same direction as the original fulcrum, and would have accelerated its rotation.

Given the apparent absence of any torque to counter the rotation of the block, the slowing of its rotation can only be explained by the breakup of most of the block, which would have destroyed its moment of inertia.