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

#3091    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 24 September 2013 - 12:28 AM

View PostStundie, on 23 September 2013 - 11:59 PM, said:

All the experts on my side were originally on your side...

Nope! First of all, your sources have not provided evidence of explosives, which is a big difference between my sources, who have provided evidence that fire was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings while on the other hand, your sources have yet to provide any evidence of explosives, which is understandable considering that:

*   No explosions seen as the WTC buildings collapsed

*   No explosions heard as the WTC buildings collapsed

*   No explosions detected on seismic monitors in the area as the WTC buildings collapsed

*   No explosive hardware found in the rubble of the WTC buildings.


Those facts alone have trashed all of your sources. :yes:

Edited by skyeagle409, 24 September 2013 - 12:34 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3092    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 24 September 2013 - 12:52 AM

View PostStundie, on 24 September 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:

Sorry but none of them are demolition experts,...

On the contrary, they are. In addition to these experts.

Quote

Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse

http://911-engineers.blogspot.com/

Did experts on the scene think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition?

"Several demolition teams had reached Ground Zero by 3:00 pm on 9/11, and these individuals witnessed the collapse of WTC 7 from within a few hundred feet of the event.


Controlled Demolition Inc

D.H. Griffin Companies

Mazzocchi Wrecking

Gateway Demolition

Yannuzzi Demolition & Disposal


All reported seeing or hearing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse..."We were all standing around helpless...we knew full well it was going to collapse. Everyone there knew. You gotta remember there was a lot of confusion and we didn't know if another plane was coming...but I never heard explosions like demo charges.


Indications of the Imminent Collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings Disprove Explosives Theory

"According to Shyam Sunder, the concave bowing of the steel was seen on the sides of the towersopposite where the planes hit them. At 10:06 a.m. that morning, an officer in a police helicopter reported that ``it's not going to take long before the north tower comes down.'' This was 20 minutes before it collapsed. In another radio transmission at 10:21 a.m., the officer said he saw buckling in the north tower's southern face, Shyam Sunder said."

http://www.represent...Explosives.html


As I have said, no one heard bomb explosions nor recovered bomb-related hardware from ground zero.

Edited by skyeagle409, 24 September 2013 - 12:53 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3093    Likely Guy

Likely Guy

    Undecided, mostly.

  • Member
  • 8,306 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Likely, Canada

  • I'd rather laugh than argue.

    Choose your weapon.

Posted 24 September 2013 - 01:17 AM

I hate to say it, but this discussion has gone nowhere over the last few days. :(


#3094    DecoNoir

DecoNoir

    The Entertainer

  • Member
  • 2,784 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Imaginaerum

  • ... The Aristocrats.

Posted 24 September 2013 - 01:20 AM

View PostLikely Guy, on 24 September 2013 - 01:17 AM, said:

I hate to say it, but this discussion has gone nowhere over the last few days. :(

This discussion hasn't gone anywhere in 12 years.

I reject your reality, and substitute my own! Mostly because yours is boring as hell.

#3095    Likely Guy

Likely Guy

    Undecided, mostly.

  • Member
  • 8,306 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Likely, Canada

  • I'd rather laugh than argue.

    Choose your weapon.

Posted 24 September 2013 - 01:26 AM

View PostDecoNoir, on 24 September 2013 - 01:20 AM, said:



This discussion hasn't gone anywhere in 12 years.

Oh, I agree! I just meant 'this particular discussion'. It used to have some entertainment value.


#3096    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 24 September 2013 - 03:52 AM

View PostDecoNoir, on 24 September 2013 - 01:20 AM, said:

This discussion hasn't gone anywhere in 12 years.

Yes indeed, and after 12 years, 911 Truthers have been unable to produce evidence implicating the U.S. government in the 911 attack, much less produce evidence that explosives were used.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3097    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 24 September 2013 - 03:57 AM

View PostLikely Guy, on 24 September 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

Oh, I agree! I just meant 'this particular discussion'. It used to have some entertainment value.

I agree! It is amazing that some references that 911 Truthers have used in their arguments was actually false misleading information planted to discredit their movement. They have claimed the sound of explosions was evidence of bombs but a playback of news coverage of 2001 shows that firefighters reported those sounds were the result of gas line explosions and nothing to do with explosives. It goes to show that 911 Truthers have been distorting the facts over those years.

It has now been determined that the molten metal was in fact, aluminum, but 911 Truthers claimed the molten metal was steel, but looking at the video, there is no steel being cut by anything, which goes to show how far 911 Truthers are willing to go to distort the facts.

Simply amazing!! The following from the investigative report.

Quote


21. Why does NIST state that a yellow stream of molten metal seen in some photographs pouring down the side of WTC2 was aluminum from the crashed plane, even though aluminum burns with a white glow?

NIST reported (NIST NCSTAR 1-5A) that just before 9:52 a.m., a bright spot appeared at the top of a window on the 80th floor of WTC 2, four windows removed from the east edge on the north face, followed by the flow of a glowing liquid. This flow lasted approximately four seconds before subsiding. Many such liquid flows were observed from near this location in the seven minutes leading up to the collapse of this tower. There is no evidence of similar molten liquid pouring out from another location in WTC 2 or from anywhere within WTC 1.

Photographs, as well as NIST simulations of the aircraft impact, show large piles of debris in the 80th and 81st floors of WTC 2 near the site where the glowing liquid eventually appeared. Much of this debris came from the aircraft itself and from the office furnishings that the aircraft pushed forward as it tunneled to this far end of the building. Large fires developed on these piles shortly after the aircraft impact and continued to burn in the area until the tower collapsed.

NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius (900 degrees Fahrenheit) and 640 degrees Celsius (1,200 degrees Fahrenheit)—depending on the particular alloy—well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.

Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface.

Summary: The flow is not steel because the structural steel would fail well below the melting temperature. The flow is likely to be a mixture of aluminum, aluminum oxides, molten glass and coals of whatever trash the aluminum flowed over as it reached the open window. Such a flow would appear orange and cool to a dark color.

Stephen D. Chastain


Edited by skyeagle409, 24 September 2013 - 04:53 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3098    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 24 September 2013 - 01:35 PM

View PostLikely Guy, on 24 September 2013 - 01:26 AM, said:

Oh, I agree! I just meant 'this particular discussion'. It used to have some entertainment value.

Exactly, this particular discussion.

In general, and consistent with human history, in the ensuing 12 years "the other conversation" has made pretty good progress.  Things have been learned, and new facts discovered.  True, many people have been in one state of denial or the other for 12 years, but many have discovered new facts and connected new dots. :tu:


#3099    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 24 September 2013 - 05:41 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 24 September 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

Exactly, this particular discussion.

In general, and consistent with human history, in the ensuing 12 years "the other conversation" has made pretty good progress. Since the 12 years, we have found that:


Things have been learned, and new facts discovered.  True, many people have been in one state of denial or the other for 12 years, but many have discovered new facts and connected new dots. :tu:

Let's take a look at what has been leaned and confirmed over the past 12 years.

1.   United 93 did not land at Cleveland Airport

  911 Truthers confused Delta 1989 as United 93.


2.   Passengers of United 93 were not seen at Cleveland Airport.

  911 Truthers confused scientist who disembarked from a KC-135 as passengers of United 93.


3. United 93 crashed in Shanksville.

Confirmed by coroner Wally Miller, United Airlines, cleanup crews, and investigators


4. American 77 crashed into the Pentagon

Confirmed by the FDR, radar data, cleanup crews, witnesses, investigators, the Boeing Aircraft Company and American Airlines


5. The WTC Towers did not fall at free fall speed

As seen in videos where debris and dust plumes outpacing the collapse of those buildings.


6.   ACARS did not depict 911 airliners airborne

  As confirmed by radar data and aircraft wreckage


7.   Turning off the transponder does not render an aircraft invisible to radar

  Which is understandable considering the B-767 and the B-757 are not stealth aircraft and by the fact that even stealth aircraft are no totally invisible to radar


8.   The Hani maneuver was very boring and well within the airframe limitations of American 77


9.   No thermite used during the 911 attack

  Which is understandable considering no such evidence was ever found


10. No explosives used during the 911 attack, which is understandable when considering:

*   No explosions seen as the WTC buildings collapsed

*   No explosions heard as the WTC buildings collapsed

*   No explosions detected on seismic monitors as the WTC buildings collapsed

*   No explosive hardware found in the rubble of the WTC building during cleanup operations


11.   No mini-nukes used during the 911 attack, and understandable considering:

*   No EMP generated

*   No Blinding flash generated

*   No shock wave generated

*   No radioactive fallout generated

*   No radioactive residue associated with nukes found at ground zero

*   No blast of any kind detected on seismic monitors in the area

*   No evidence of temperatures reaching millions of degrees at ground zero

12.   Cleanup crews and investigators were not wearing appropriate protective clothing

Such clothing would be mandatory for anyone working within a radioactive contaminated site


13.   The mini-nuke story is false by common sense alone


14. No P700 anti-ship missile struck the Pentagon


15. No missile struck the WTC Towers


16. No modified pod attached to United 175

911 Truthers confused aerodynamic fairings and gear doors, which are standard on all B-767s, as a pod


17. No missile fired from United 175 before it struck WTC2
  
No such evidence seen in the videos


18. No molten steel flowing from WTC2.

It has been determined the molten flow was aluminum mixed with contents from with United 175 and WTC2


19. No one heard bomb explosions

Firefighters told a MSNBC reporter the sound of explosions they heard were from exploding gas lines. Other firefighters attributed other such sounds to things that had nothing to do with explosives.

20.   No death ray beam demolished the WTC buildings


21.   No 911 airliner was switched


22. The 911 airliners were not capable nor modified to fly under remote control

  The airlines would not have allowed their aircraft to be grounded for months in order to have them modified to fly under remote control. An examination of flight data and control inputs  
have proven the aircraft were not flown under remote control


23. There were not two B-767s at Boston Airport with the desinations of Flight 175

  Airport officials, servicing personnel, and United Airlines would have been made aware of a bogus B-767 under the United Airline colors, which would have been understandable
considering United Airlines would not have paid for the landing nor gate fee for a bogus B-767.

So yes, we learned much over the past 12 years that 911 Truthers were simply wrong





  

Edited by skyeagle409, 24 September 2013 - 05:58 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3100    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 24 September 2013 - 07:45 PM

Such a guy, Sky. :nw:


#3101    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 24 September 2013 - 07:46 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 24 September 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

Such a guy, Sky. :nw:

Facts are facts!! :yes:

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3102    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 19,031 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 25 September 2013 - 04:05 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 24 September 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

Facts are facts!! :yes:
And on top of the Facts Skyeagle there has been not One thread of Proof to over turn all the Actual Facts of 9/11/ By anyone ,anywhere,any time ! So sad that the C.T`s Keep making such Fools of themselfs ! :tu:

This is a Work in Progress!

#3103    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 25 September 2013 - 04:53 AM

View PostDONTEATUS, on 25 September 2013 - 04:05 AM, said:

And on top of the Facts Skyeagle there has been not One thread of Proof to over turn all the Actual Facts of 9/11/ By anyone ,anywhere,any time ! So sad that the C.T`s Keep making such Fools of themselfs ! :tu:

It was clearly evident they were unaware it was determined some time ago the molten metal flowing from WTC2 was aluminum mixed with other materials, not steel, and I provided them with little hints without telling them the rest of the story, but they posted as if they knew what they were talking about. They failed to take notice the silvery droplets indicated the molten metal falling from the corner of WTC2 where much of the airframe of United 175 came to rest, was not steel. They also fail to realize that the buckling of the WTC buildings was evidence that fire, not explosives, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings.

They failed to make the connections between raging fires and the buckling of the WTC buildings just moments before they collapsed. I might add that the impacts were so violent they knocked off fire protection from the structures, so what made them think that explosives or thermite would have remained attached to anything in the locations of the impacts?

It was evident they were unaware that firefighters reported the sound of explosions they heard was from gas line explosions, which had nothing to do with explosives, yet they continue to rave as though they knew what they were talking about. Apparently, they missed the rerun of the 911 news coverage of that day, otherwise they would have heard the reporter making that announcement in regard to the reports from the firefighters.

Despite the fact it has been posted the sound of explosions was not evidence of explosives, they continued to rave on as though the sound of explosions was the result of demolition charges. I even went so far as to provide hints of the fact that manhole cover explosions were not uncommon in New York City, but somehow over the years, 911 Truthers managed to mutate the original news reports into a monster that did not exist in 2001.

This is really out into outer space.

Quote

There were two B-767s at Boston Airport with the designation of Flight 175, or the aircraft were switched with no accounting for the passenges or that the passengers and crew were part of the conspiracy.

Simply amazing!

Edited by skyeagle409, 25 September 2013 - 05:07 AM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#3104    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

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

Posted 26 September 2013 - 04:28 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 24 September 2013 - 12:52 AM, said:

On the contrary, they are.

In addition to these experts.

[/size]

As I have said, no one heard bomb explosions nor recovered bomb-related hardware from ground zero.
Do you have quotes from....

Controlled Demolition Inc

D.H. Griffin Companies

Mazzocchi Wrecking

Gateway Demolition

Yannuzzi Demolition & Disposal


Or are going to tell me that Brent Blanchard says these companies never heard any explosions?? lol In otherwords, promoting hearsay as evidence....lol

So at the moment, it's still 2 v 7...lol

There is actually a 3rd demo expert you could use, the problem is that you don't have the smarts to work out who that is and more importantly, you'll still lose!! lol

Edited by Stundie, 26 September 2013 - 04:29 PM.

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

#3105    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 26 September 2013 - 05:09 PM

View PostStundie, on 26 September 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

Controlled Demolition Inc

D.H. Griffin Companies

Mazzocchi Wrecking

Gateway Demolition

Yannuzzi Demolition & Disposal



Which shows why you lost that case as well.  :yes:

BTW, none of your sources have provided evidence, :no: while on the other hand, my sources have. :yes:

Edited by skyeagle409, 26 September 2013 - 05:19 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users