I want A debunker to try to Debunk this

[Enigma wrapped in a puzzle]

This is an excellent video and anyone who tries to refute this is going to have a very hard time.

http://www.911weknow.com/index.php?option=...1&Itemid=31

Edited June 19, 2008 by Enigma wrapped in a puzzle

[MID]

This is an excellent video and anyone who tries to refute this is going to have a very hard time.

http://www.911weknow.com/index.php?option=...1&Itemid=31

I think those who have already done so might be able to argue with you...

This film is a montage of uneducated people speaking to things they know absolutely nothing about.

[Enigma wrapped in a puzzle]

I think those who have already done so might be able to argue with you...

This film is a montage of uneducated people speaking to things they know absolutely nothing about.

This post should be removed!

You did not even watch the clip, if you posted this. They have interviews with engineers, demo specialists, workers who were in the basement of the towers before they collapsed and many more. This movie illustrates exactly how these building were brought down.

Watch the movie before you post again. This movie is an hour and a half long and you did not even have time to watch it yet.

[InHuman]

Lol, hour and a half? No ty.

Theres alot of 9/11 threads, try reading around and seeing what the other side has to offer first.

[Enigma wrapped in a puzzle]

Lol, hour and a half? No ty.

Theres alot of 9/11 threads, try reading around and seeing what the other side has to offer first.

I have

I have followed the 9/11 stuff on this forum for a long time, this movie is very good. Anyone who has the time to watch it should do so. I have watched many others and this one does the best job imo.

[iSeeDeadPpl!]

zeitgeist is good too

[Enigma wrapped in a puzzle]

zeitgeist is good too

I watched it and yes it was good. This goes further into detail.

[MID]

This post should be removed!

You did not even watch the clip, if you posted this. They have interviews with engineers, demo specialists, workers who were in the basement of the towers before they collapsed and many more. This movie illustrates exactly how these building were brought down.

Watch the movie before you post again. This movie is an hour and a half long and you did not even have time to watch it yet.

Baloney..

It's old news.

Seen it all!

There's no substantiation of anyone's credentials included here.

The WTC collapse is well understood by actual engineers who's business it is to understand such things.

It's crap.

[bigdog112]

Baloney..

It's old news.

Seen it all!

There's no substantiation of anyone's credentials included here.

The WTC collapse is well understood by actual engineers who's business it is to understand such things.

It's crap.

LOL i find it funny that any one with half a brain could think a jet fuel fire melted steel... its just stupid. even in a controlled burn jet fuel cant melt steel and I knew that 5 years before 9/11

[Enigma wrapped in a puzzle]

Baloney..

It's old news.

Seen it all!

There's no substantiation of anyone's credentials included here.

The WTC collapse is well understood by actual engineers who's business it is to understand such things.

It's crap.

Sorry MID but this subject YOU have no idea what your talking about. Those towers did not come down by jet fuel and flames. Again I say you need to watch the clip to post in this thread. This thread is about that clip so please do not comment on it again until you have seen it.

[hydro]

LOL i find it funny that any one with half a brain could think a jet fuel fire melted steel... its just stupid. even in a controlled burn jet fuel cant melt steel and I knew that 5 years before 9/11

umm, why would it have to melt the steel in order to collapse? if you take away a percentage of the strength by heating the steel it would not be able to hold the weight. common sense man, but for the sake of arguement lets just say, it didnt melt the steel but instead warped the steel, or made it eaiser to bend.

[jaylemurph]

Sorry MID but this subject YOU have no idea what your talking about. Those towers did not come down by jet fuel and flames. Again I say you need to watch the clip to post in this thread. This thread is about that clip so please do not comment on it again until you have seen it.

Unlike a lot of CTers 'round here -- hell, unlike /me/ -- I've never once seen MID talk when he has no idea what he's talking about. Perhaps if you'd like to bring up specific points with him, you'd find that out.

I might also add that (by virtue of you posting and not being a small, greasy spot) you weren't /at/ the WTC when they fell to say definitively whether or not they came down by the action of jet-fueled fire, so you might want to be a little more circumspect in how you phrase things. Especially if you want to pursue a discussion with MID.

--Jaylemurph

[mrbusdriver]

a 20 hour inferno vs 3 hours of "smoke".

I don't think so. They talk about the B25 Empire State Building crash. They talk about a slow flying 707 crash. They don't mention a near 500mph impact and serious fire. There was serious, spreading fire and significant impact damage to floors, core and exterior steel. Any "comparisons" are invalid, taking all the factors into account.

[Sunofone]

umm, why would it have to melt the steel in order to collapse? if you take away a percentage of the strength by heating the steel it would not be able to hold the weight. common sense man, but for the sake of arguement lets just say, it didnt melt the steel but instead warped the steel, or made it eaiser to bend.

common sense is knowing that even if the steel was only weakened that there is still no way on earth that the towers would have collapsed at the speed of free fall-- never mind that there was molten steel in the sub basements and the videos show clear evidence of squibs and it took 6 weeks to cool

[Obviousman]

I still find it amazing that people who claim to have looked at 9/11 in detail still talk about melted steel, etc. People talk about common sense; well, sense isn't so common.

[Cradle of Fish]

I'll debunk it without even watching it.

To believe that you also have to believe:

1) George W. Bush and his administration, who have mismanaged two wars, one horribly, while neglecting the other, and was partially responsible for the aftermath of Katrina, could have organised something like this and not have one single hint escape. You also have to believe that one of the most corrupt administrations ever, with all it's scandals and crooks could have kept the secret for at least seven years, without some disillusioned crook trying to get the story out. And if you don't believe that, you have to believe in some mythical secret society that has absolutely no evidence for it's existance. And I'm sorry, but paranoid rantings trying to link the seal on the American dollar bill to rich and private(nothing wrong with wanting privacy) businessmen.

2) You have to believe that the US is more of a threat to your life than the global and violent Islamic radical movement, responsible for the Madrid and London bombings, embassy bombings in africa, Pan Am flight 103, murdering Theo van Gogh and attempting to murder Salman Rushdie, not to mention random acts of violence around the world, and within their own country.

You have every right to believe whatever you want, no matter how contradictory it is to reality, but don't expect anyone to be convinced.

[mn001]

I don't know how anyone can not think theres something fishy about what happened on 9/11. There are too many things that can't be rationalized.

[Obviousman]

I don't know how anyone can not think theres something fishy about what happened on 9/11. There are too many things that can't be rationalized.

This is a concept I see many "truthers" failing to understand. Is the government hiding something? Yes. They are hiding systemic failures and / or incompetencies associated with personnel, that the government wishes to avoid making public. They are doing what governments always do. That's why I do support further investigation into what happened.

I do NOT believe the government had anything to do with organising / facilitating 9/11.

The use of the term "...something fishy..." is so ambiguous. Apologies, but it says to me that you haven't really CHECKED on facets of 9/11; you have just heard something and it "sounds right".

Have you spoken to building engineers who have the necessary skills to speak authoritatively about building collapse? I - have - several of them.

Have you spoken to F-15 / F-16 pilots about alert states and response times? I have - several of them.

(I also have 20+ years of aviation experience myself, as aircrew, air traffic control, and operations).

Have you spoken to airline pilots (heavys - 747 / 757 / 767 / A300, etc) about what happened? I have - many of them.

There is NOTHING "fishy" about 9/11.

[Space Commander Travis]

This post should be removed!

You did not even watch the clip, if you posted this. They have interviews with engineers, demo specialists, workers who were in the basement of the towers before they collapsed and many more. This movie illustrates exactly how these building were brought down.

Watch the movie before you post again. This movie is an hour and a half long and you did not even have time to watch it yet.

let me get this straight? You want the "debunkers" to sit through a hour and a half of conspiratorial outpourings (with, for some reason, it appears, Slovak subtitles), otherwise their opnions are not valid and ought to be removed.

Yup, the ttruth movement, standing up for freedom of speech.

[chrisfreak]

Can't you just summarize the video?

[theSOURCE]

Can't you just summarize the video?

Apparently not because, heaven forbid, it would require actual thought about the subject, and that may lead to the conclusion that, just perhaps, it may all be a bunch of crap.

[Rosewin]

Unlike a lot of CTers 'round here -- hell, unlike /me/ -- I've never once seen MID talk when he has no idea what he's talking about. Perhaps if you'd like to bring up specific points with him, you'd find that out.

I might also add that (by virtue of you posting and not being a small, greasy spot) you weren't /at/ the WTC when they fell to say definitively whether or not they came down by the action of jet-fueled fire, so you might want to be a little more circumspect in how you phrase things. Especially if you want to pursue a discussion with MID.

--Jaylemurph

Reread MID's first post and look closely at his first and last comments in that post. It is unlikely anyone would want to carry out a discussion with him, not me that is for sure.

Well on topic I do know for sure that the claim that these terrorist learn how to fly these planes at small flight schools is rather dubious. The flight simulators needed to learn to fly such huge planes are not simply located at small flight schools. So that leads me to conclude that either the 'terrorists' were not flying the planes or they had additional training only a few companies in the world could offer them.

I have also seen the videos of the towers falling, it was a controlled demolition most likely. Does it matter what other people think even if they do not believe such facts? No, cause in the end the majority of people do not think at all, and do not have an opinion one way or another, they simply believe whatever their governments tells them to without question.

Edited June 20, 2008 by Clovis

[Space Commander Travis]

Reread MID's first post and look closely at his first and last comments in that post. It is unlikely anyone would want to carry out a discussion with him, not me that is for sure.

Well on topic I do know for sure that the claim that these terrorist learn how to fly these planes at small flight schools is rather dubious. The flight simulators needed to learn to fly such huge planes are not simply located at small flight schools. So that leads me to conclude that either the 'terrorists' were not flying the planes or they had additional training only a few companies in the world could offer them.

I have also seen the videos of the towers falling, it was a controlled demolition most likely. Does it matter what other people think even if they do not believe such facts? No, cause in the end the majority of people do not think at all, and do not have an opinion one way or another, they simply believe whatever their governments tells them to without question.

i did reread his post. it seemed to sum it up in a nutshell, i thought.

As regards the points you've mentioned, I do think that some parts of them might be worth closer investigation; but I don't know if the video under discussion merely considers those points, or whether it goes into the whole "switched-planes-and-vast-government-conspiracy" line of argument that so many spend so much of their time arguing, and, at an hour and a half long, I don't think I'd have the willpower to find out.

[Rosewin]

I did not see the video either. I doubt the points I brought up were in the video..well not the one about flight simulator accessibility at least. Zeitgeist did a good enough job convincing me that something is amiss not sure if I want to invest that much time in another video either. But I do think calling something simply nonsense, regardless of what people think, is either tactful or signified any intelligence. Maybe it is acceptable at the pub when people are half drunk but that type of language is not impressive in the least to me when discussing such a serious topic but that is just my view.

[Siara]

umm, why would it have to melt the steel in order to collapse? if you take away a percentage of the strength by heating the steel it would not be able to hold the weight. common sense man, but for the sake of arguement lets just say, it didnt melt the steel but instead warped the steel, or made it eaiser to bend.

Exactly. As someone who welds steel on a daily basis I can tell you that the temperature at which steel loses its strength is WAY below the melting point.