Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 4 votes

911 inside job - for what?


  • Please log in to reply
4446 replies to this topic

#3001    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,539 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 11 September 2013 - 12:56 AM

View PostStundie, on 11 September 2013 - 12:55 AM, said:

Sorry Fraudboy,...

I am sorry to hear that you cannot come up with evidence that refutes what I have been asserting. :lol:

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3002    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 September 2013 - 01:03 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 11 September 2013 - 12:56 AM, said:

I am sorry to hear that you cannot come up with evidence that refutes what I have been asserting. :lol:
Fraudboy, I'm still waiting for the evidence from these thousands of demolition experts you claimed agree with the official story.

I think you have confused 1000's with the number 1. A few zeros short by the looks of it. lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#3003    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,539 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 11 September 2013 - 01:07 AM

View PostStundie, on 11 September 2013 - 01:03 AM, said:

Fraudboy,

Fraudboy?! How amusing when you cannot even come up with evidence that has been asked of you that proves your point and I am STILL waiting for that evidence :yes:
!

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3004    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 September 2013 - 01:14 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 11 September 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:

Fraudboy?! How amusing when you cannot even come up with evidence that has been asked of you that proves your point and I am STILL waiting for that evidence :yes:
!
And I've been waiting for your evidence. :rolleyes:

So far you've got 1....I still need another 999+ to make the thousands of demolition experts you say agree with you and your position.

I'll just wait for the other 999 to come or just wait until you concede that you are wrong. I'm sure neither will happen anytime soon......lol

It's a good job I'm patient......lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#3005    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,539 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 11 September 2013 - 01:19 AM

View PostStundie, on 11 September 2013 - 01:14 AM, said:

And I've been waiting for your evidence.


Perhaps, you are talkng about this


                                          #1425                    

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3006    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 September 2013 - 01:35 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 11 September 2013 - 01:19 AM, said:

Perhaps, you are talkng about this


  #1425
No, no, no....I am talking the thousand of demolition experts you claim to exist.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#3007    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,539 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 11 September 2013 - 01:56 AM

View PostStundie, on 11 September 2013 - 01:35 AM, said:

No, no, no....I am talking the thousand of demolition experts you claim to exist.

But, they are the groups that consist of thousands of members who  agreed with the OCT.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3008    TheSpoon

TheSpoon

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 80 posts
  • Joined:24 Aug 2013

Posted 11 September 2013 - 02:00 AM

So I read everything passed my post and I have a gigantic grin on my face, Stundie you the man. Skyeagle the only reason this conversation is still going is because this is a skeptical and independent topic, every time you spew 'logic' you derail back to "you have no evidence". The collapse does not follow physics as a natural event, the fire had to little time to expand, aerated pockets gushed out as each floor collapsed on it self, Steel that is weakened by fire (even to a glow) will not collapse symmetrically as redundant un-damaged steel will effect it in SOME way and with a building as tall as the WTC's it would dramatically effect it's trajectory.


#3009    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 September 2013 - 02:04 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 11 September 2013 - 01:56 AM, said:

But, they are the groups that consist of thousands of members who  agreed with the OCT.
Oh no, no, no, no......lol ACSE members are not demolition experts/

You claimed there were thousand of demolition experts.

Go find them or otherwise, come back with your tail between your legs and admit that you only have 1 demolition expert who disagrees with the demolition theory.

Not thousands. Face it, you are wrong. lol

Edited by Stundie, 11 September 2013 - 02:05 AM.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#3010    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,539 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 11 September 2013 - 04:19 AM

View PostStundie, on 11 September 2013 - 02:04 AM, said:

Oh no, no, no, no......lol ACSE members are not demolition experts/...

Since I have already posted the names of the demolition companies at ground zero who dismissed the demolition theory, the ACSE is just the icing on the cake. Remember, members of those demolition companies heard no demolition charges going off as the WTC buildings collapsed.

It was all right there in my post so I don't know how you missed it.

Edited by skyeagle409, 11 September 2013 - 04:20 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3011    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,539 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 11 September 2013 - 04:36 AM

View PostTheSpoon, on 11 September 2013 - 02:00 AM, said:

So I read everything passed my post and I have a gigantic grin on my face, Stundie you the man. Skyeagle the only reason this conversation is still going is because this is a skeptical and independent topic, every time you spew 'logic' you derail back to "you have no evidence".

It is all very simple, evidence counts and there is no evidence that refutes what I have stated.

Quote

The collapse does not follow physics as a natural event,

Of course it does. The floors of the WTC buildings were tied between the inner core and the outer facade of the WTC buildings so in that respect, there was no other way for the buildings to fall and to backup my claim, I have poster and reposted closeup videos of WTC2 just before it collapsed and the buckling confirmed what I have asserted all along and that buckling debunks 911 conspiracy claims right off the bat. Simple to understand.

To sum that up, the buckling of the WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 proved my case that fire, not explosives, were responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings. Now, prove my wrong with viable evidence and if you are unable to do so, I will use you inability to provide such evidence to my advantage :yes: and highlight the fact that 911 truthers don't bother to do their homework or do it properly when they do. :no:  


Now, where is the evidence the buckling was caused by explosives?

Quote

...the fire had to little time to expand,

It doesn't take very long to weaken steel with the fires that were raging within the WTC buildings that day. Where did you get that idea?

Quote

...aerated pockets gushed out as each floor collapsed on it self,

Which was expected considering that most of the interior of the WTC buildings was air, but it seems that you didn't know that. Where did you think all of that air had to go as the WTC buildings collapsed?

Do  your homework and learn about the syringe effect and tall buildings. Simple law of science that I learned back in school, you understand, so all I did today was to enlighten you on what I learned in school decades ago because you didn't know, so now, you can't say that I never taught you anything.

Let's take a look.

Quote

ENERGY TRANSFER IN THE WTC COLLAPSE

Thus, based on the dimensions of each WTC tower, there were 10,000 m3 of “open space” per floor. The collapsing floor acted like a giant piston compressing the air occupying the open space between floor and ceiling.

Now, what was that you were saying? Do you see why I put those on notice for not doing their homework?

Quote

Steel that is weakened by fire (even to a glow) will not collapse symmetrically...

Of course it will and it has already happened. Follow the links.

  #161

  #184

Challenging September 11 conspiracy theories

Were the twin towers destroyed by controlled explosion?

The 9/11 Commission was set up in 2002 .It interviewed more than 1,200 people in 10 countries and reviewed more than 2.5 million pages of documents. It found 'no corroborating evidence' that the towers were brought down by a controlled demolition.

Expect to be  tested should you decide to take on my challenge. :yes: In other words, you had better learn to do your homework and do it properly if you do.

Edited by skyeagle409, 11 September 2013 - 04:58 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3012    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:22 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 11 September 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

Since I have already posted the names of the demolition companies at ground zero who dismissed the demolition theory, the ACSE is just the icing on the cake.
No, no, no Sigmund Fraud! You are getting your knickers in a twist.

You didn't say that ACSE and demolition companies at GZ dismissed the demolition theory, you said there was thousands of demolition experts to counter the 7 or 8 I posted.

So when your ready....You are on 1 so far, just 999 to go??

Or you could just concede and say I'm sorry Stundie, I got it wrong.

View Postskyeagle409, on 11 September 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

Remember, members of those demolition companies heard no demolition charges going off as the WTC buildings collapsed.
Other than the 1 so far, Brent Blanchard and Protec, would you be so kind as to quote them?? lol

You said there were thousands of demolition experts right? So I'm sure these thousands work for multiple demolition companies so you shouldn't have any problems providing names and quotes to back up your new assertion?? Along with the individuals?

1 demo expert and 1 company so far. Your not doing to well are you?? lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 11 September 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

It was all right there in my post so I don't know how you missed it.
Sorry but I didn't see a post where you named thousands of demo experts or the companies they worked for say that the collapse of the WTC were not a demolition.

I'll await the names or a retraction, whichever comes sooner....lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#3013    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,539 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:28 AM

View PostTheSpoon, on 11 September 2013 - 02:00 AM, said:

Skyeagle the only reason this conversation is still going is because this is a skeptical and independent topic, every time you spew 'logic' you derail back to "you have no evidence".

I wish to add that should you decide to participate in the debate you had better do your homework and do it right!! To simply say that fire cannot do this to a steel frame building or do that to a steel frame building because you don't understand how it can happen, just won't cut it.

The reason why I have asked 911 conspiracist to produce evidence is because I am putting them on the spot and know they have no such evidence to present, so I place them on a pedestal as an example of how 911 conspiracist pull things out of thin air and not understand a thing of what they are posting.

As a pilot and aircraft structural technician of over 40 years, I can relate to the things that occurred during the 911 attack. As a pilot, I can relate to what occurred in the air before and after the 911 were hijacked and eventually slammed into buildings and in the case at Shanksville, flown into the ground. As an airframe technician, I can relate to the airframes of the B-767 and the B-757 and knew there was no way those aircraft were modified to fly under remote control nor flown under remote control and to the structures of the WTC buildings. As a retired member of the Air Force, I can relate to events at the Pentagon and air intercepts. BTW, a former Wing commander of my unit was in the Pentagon when American 77 slammed into the building and he highlighted events that day during his going-away dinner which I attended. Since then, I ran into another Air Force member who was inside the Pentagon that day and confirmed what I have been telling readers for a very long time on these threads.

The altitude flight data should have told the 911 truthers that at no time during the flights were the aircraft flown under remote control, which was evident whenever the autopilot was turned off, but because many 911 truthers were unable to decipher the data, they concocted the remote control theory out of pure ignorance. In addition, the B-767 and the B-757 are not FBW aircraft, which should have been another hint that those aircraft could not have flown under remote control, especially since they belonged to American Airlines and United Airlines.

To modify the aircraft in such a manner would have required many months of planning, engineering redesign and extensive structural modifications and testing and furthermore, did they think the airlines would have grounded their aircraft to have them modified for the purpose of having them flown under remote control from the ground? I think not! I know the aircraft were not switched because it would take me less than 30 minutes to reveal a switched aircraft and remember, only a certain number of B-767-200s and B-757-200s were built and easy to trace, after all, it only took me a few minutes to trace the first aircraft I flew as a student pilot.

In the case of the tampered transponders, another theory was hatched because of pure ignorance and suggested that tampering with the transponders made the 911 aircraft invisible. I have to say that tampering with the transponder does not make an aircraft invisible to radar. The B-757 and the B-767 are not stealth aircraft so what made the 911 truthers think that tampering with the transponder would make an aircraft invisible to radar? Even the B-2 stealth bomber is not totally invisible to radar. Turning off the transponder just makes it that much more difficult to track, not make it invisible. Even though the transponder of American 77 was tampered with, ground controller were still able to track the aircraft but they lost basic information related to American 77, but the aircraft was still tracked, so once again, 911 truther hatched another unfound conspiracy out of shear ignorance of the facts.

As a retired member of the Air Force, I knew the stories that Air Force fighters were diverted was false. First of all, the pilots did not receive orders to shoot down the 911 aircraft until after United 93 had crashed and secondly, they was mass confusion within the ATC system as to what was going on. Thirdly, how would a pilot know which aircraft was a threat or not. An off-course airliner is not evidence either and I can show you cases where aircraft were many miles off course as was the case of a TWA cargo jet that overflew its destination and ended out over the Pacific Ocean and there are other cases of off-course aircraft as well.

Another conspiracy theory revolves around our interceptors. NORAD has certain air defense protocols in place that F-16 pilots at Andrews AFB were not familiar with. In fact, they were not properly trained to conduct air intercepts but the 911 conspiracist didn't know that, so they hatched another unfounded conspiracy because they didn't know any better and that is another reason why I have asserted that 911 truther claims are simply ignorant-based and rightly so because they have proven it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

They are also confusing "secure" with "heavily defended." A federal official once revealed that in one case, military jets could identify and intercept only about 40 percent of intruders in training drills. 911 conspiracist didn't know that so they hatched yet another unfounded conspiracy theory and once again, confirming my claim that 911 truther claims are ignorant-based.

Now, we come to molten metal issue. There is really no contest because the silvery molten droplets seen falling from the corner of WTC2 automatically dismissed the molten metal as steel. In addition, it was that corner of the building where a good portion of the airframe of United 175 came to rest and looking at the videos of that corner,  you can see fires raging within that corner of the building and remember, ordinary officer fires can create temperatures high enough to melt aluminum, but too low to melt steel, which is simply common sense logic that should have told the 911 conspiracist that the molten flow was NOT steel by that very fact, but because 911 truther claims are ignorant-based, they didn't know any better so what did they do? They hatched yet another unfounded conspiracy theory out of pure ignorance.

Videos and photos of that corner of WTC2 shows silvery droplets falling from that section and because a poster didn't do his homework properly, he posted a video depicting someone pouring molten aluminum and silvery droplets can be seen as well. Well, guess what! You can also see silvery droplets falling from the corner of WTC2, which simply means that by posting that video he actually debunked his own case  I posted an aluminum temperature chart and what did he do? He confused the aluminum chart and tried to apply the information to make his case for molten steel! Simply amazing!!

I hope you get the point that when 911 conspiracist post, they are being graded and at this point, they are receiving failing grades for not doing their homework or NOT doing it properly when they do.

Edited by skyeagle409, 11 September 2013 - 07:45 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3014    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,539 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:30 AM

View PostStundie, on 11 September 2013 - 07:22 AM, said:

You didn't say that ACSE and demolition companies at GZ dismissed the demolition theory, you said there was thousands of demolition experts to counter the 7 or 8 I posted.

Where's you so-called evidence that refutes what I have been posting? Don't tell me you still don't have it.

Edited by skyeagle409, 11 September 2013 - 07:30 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3015    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 31,539 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 11 September 2013 - 07:34 AM

View PostStundie, on 11 September 2013 - 07:22 AM, said:

Other than the 1 so far, Brent Blanchard and Protec,...

Brent Blanchard, the world's LEADING authority on demolition implosions.

http://vincentdunn.com/wtc.html

http://toolateforreg...owbuckling.html

http://www.nowtheend...om/blog/?p=7075

And;

  #2119

Edited by skyeagle409, 11 September 2013 - 07:53 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users