Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Advanced Fusion device at WTC?
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > News, Media & World Events > Conspiracies & Secret Societies
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Sunofone
the enigma of 9/11 and the destruction of the wtc complex that day continues to baffle scientists and reasonable logical thinkers everywhere-- recently a finnish military expert released a report detailing 24 reasons he believes an advanced fusion device was used at the wtc complex on 9/11-- now im no military expert but the issues raised deserve to be investigated as well as the suspicious behavior of an ex prosecutor in 41 shot gulianni in destroying evidence-- the eye witness testimony of firefighters and journalists overflow with terms like "secondary device;bomb;explosion; and... detonators..the kind used to bring down a building" when this is compounded with the assault on our constitution and the outright financial corruption of the last 80 years is obvious and in plain view-- the recent video completely ending all doubt in the oklahoma murrah demolition and ensuing govt lie surrounding it and the air traffic controller coming out recently detailing his belief in the fact that 9/11 was an inside job and that there is an ensuing gag and cover up should convince even the hard core skeptic-- although imo those that do not wake up after viewing the collapse of bldg 7 will never admit to what is right before them due to cognitive dissonance--anyway here are the 24 points raised by the finnish military expert-- i would like to here both opinions on each of these issues as they point to the crime of the century
***************************************************************
QUOTE
Evidence of advanced fusion devices at the WTC:



1. Pulverization of 99% of concrete into ultra fine dust as recorded by official studies. Concrete dust was created instantly throughout the towers when the fusion device million degree heat rapidly expanded water vapour 1000-fold in the concrete floors.



2. Superheated steels ablating (vaporizing continuously as they fall) as seen in video clips of the towers collapsing. This requires uniform temperatures roughly twice that of thermite. Conventional demolition or explosive charges (thermate, rdx, hdx etc.) cannot transfer heath so rapidly that the steel goes above it's boiling temperature.



3. 22 ton outer wall steel sections ejected 200 meters into the winter garden. Cutting charges cannot eject heavy steels and throwing charges cannot provide the energy required without heavy, solid surface mounts.



4. 330 ton section of outer wall columns ripping off side of tower. Cutting charges cannot eject heavy steels linked together and throwing charges cannot provide the energy required without very heavy, solid surfaces to mount those charges.



5. Molten ponds of steel at the bottom of elevator shafts (WTC1, WTC2, WTC7). Massive heath loads have been present at the lower parts of these high-rise buildings. As one of the witnesses after seeing the flow of metals declared: "no one will be found alive".



6. The spire behaviour (stands for 20-30 seconds, evaporates and goes down, steel dust remains in the air where the spire was). The spire did not stand because it lost its durability when the joints vaporized.



7. Sharp spikes in seismograph readings (Richter 2.1 and 2.3) occurred at the beginning of collapse for both towers. Short duration and high power indicate an explosive event.



8. A press weighting 50 tons disappeared from a basement floor of Twin Towers and was never recovered from debris. Not possible with collapses or controlled demolitions. The press was vaporized or melted totally.



9. Bone dust cloud around the WTC. This was found not until spring 2006 from the Deutsche Bank building. (In excess of 700 human remains found on the roof and from air vents). See http://www.911citizenswatch.org/print.php?sid=906



10. Fires took 100 days to extinguish despite continuous spraying of water. Thermate would burn out totally and then cool down much faster, just in a few days. This long cooling time means the total heath load being absorbed into the steels of the WTC was massive, far in excess anything found in collapses or typical controlled demolitions.



11. Brown shades of color in the air due nuclear radiation forming NO2, NO3 and nitric acid. TV and documentary footage changed the color balance to blue to disguise this fact indicating complicity in the coverup.



12. Elevated Tritium values measured in the WTC area but not elsewhere in New York. Official studies stated that 8 EXIT signs from two commercial Boeing jets were responsible. The tritium in those EXIT signs is insufficient to explain the measurements (very little tritium is available for measuring after evaporation into air as hydrogen and as tritiated water vapour. This can provide conclusive proof of fusion devices and therefore US/Israeli military involvement.



13. Pyroclastic flow observed in the concrete-based clouds. Only found with volcanic eruptions and nuclear detonations. The explosion squibs cool down just a few milliseconds after the explosion or after having reached some 10 meters in the air. Pyroclastic flow will not mix with other clouds meaning very serious heath in those clouds not possible with the conventional demolition or explosive charges. The pyroclastic clouds were cooling down at the WTC but this process took some 30 seconds. See http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1381525012075538113



14. Huge expanding dust clouds 5 times the volume of the building indicating extreme levels of heat generated far in excess of traditional demolition explosives.



15. Rubble height was some 10% of the original instead of 33% expected in a traditional demolition. Fusion device removal of underground central steel framework allowed upper framework to fall into this empty space and reduce the rubble height.



16. No survivors found, except some firefighters in one corner pocket in the rubble who looked up to see blue sky above them instead of being crushed by collapsing debris. Upward fusion flashlight-like beam of destruction missed this pocket but removed debris above those lucky firemen.



17. 14 rescue dogs and some rescue workers died far too soon afterward to be attributed to asbestos or dust toxins (respiratory problems due to alpha and tritium particles created by fusion are far more toxic)



18. Record concentrations of near-atomic size metal particles found in dust studies due to ablated steel. Only possible with vaporized (boiling) steels.



19. Decontamination procedure used at Ground Zero (hi-pressure water spraying) for all steel removed from site. Water spraying contains fusion radioactivity.



20. No bodies, furniture or computers found in the rubble, but intact sheets of paper covered the streets with fine dust. Items with significant mass absorbed fusion energy (neutrons, x-rays) and were vaporized while paper did not. Paper and powder theory.



21. 200 000 gallon sprinkler water tanks on the roofs of WTC1 and WTC2, but no water in the ruins. Heat of fusion devices vaporized large reservoirs of water.



22. Reports of cars exploding around the WTC and many burned out wrecks could be seen that had not been hit by debris. Fusion energy (heath radiation and the neutrons) caused cars to ignite and burn far from WTC site.



23. Wide area electrical outage, repairs took over 3 months. Fusion devices cause EM pulse with Compton scattering. See German engineers help the USA plate 5. http://home.debitel.net/user/andreas.bunkahle/defaulte.htm



24. EM pulse was recorded by broadcast cameras with high quality electronic circuitry. This occurred at the same time as the seismic peaks recorded by Lamont Doherty during the beginning of the collapse. This is due to the Compton Effect and resulted in a large area power outage at the WTC.

link
dantheman2435
I highly doubt it.
frenat
Most of this article is just hilarious. These two points though I know are deliberately misleading or just plain wrong.

QUOTE
7. Sharp spikes in seismograph readings (Richter 2.1 and 2.3) occurred at the beginning of collapse for both towers. Short duration and high power indicate an explosive event.
The spikes only appear to be right at the beginning of the collapse when the graphs are viewed in a highly compressed scale. When viewed at a more detailed scale, there does not appear to be a spike at the beginning at all. I have not seen any seismologists agree with the spike at the beginning either.
More info here.
http://www.911myths.com/html/seismic_record.html

QUOTE
8. A press weighting 50 tons disappeared from a basement floor of Twin Towers and was never recovered from debris. Not possible with collapses or controlled demolitions. The press was vaporized or melted totally.

I have heard about the 50-ton press before but I had not heard the claim that it was vaporized or melted. One quick point though is when it it is called a 50-ton press, it is not because it weighs 50-tons. It is called such for that is the amount of force it can apply. The press weighs much, much less.
these are all 50-ton presses
linked-image

linked-image

Note this one is made mostly of wood.
linked-image
aquatus1
Well, the sillier these theories get, the sooner people will realize the less silly ones are still somewhat nonsensical. I honestly try to avoid dismissing theories out of hand without explanation, but in this particular case, I will make an exception. The idea of a fusion device having gone off in one of the WTC towers is ridiculous at the very least, outright idiotic at best.
Aztec Warrior
If this topic hasn't been pounded to the ground enough, now we have fusion devices. laugh.gif

A fusion device, aka nuclear bomb, would have destroyed ALL of Manhattan. There is no "small" fusion device.
Lilly
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 22 2006, 02:10 PM) [snapback]1471093[/snapback]
... I honestly try to avoid dismissing theories out of hand without explanation, but in this particular case, I will make an exception. The idea of a fusion device having gone off in one of the WTC towers is ridiculous at the very least, outright idiotic at best.


Wow, I mean WOW. Yes, aquatus, please do dismiss away in this case! linked-image
aquatus1
At the very least, we have an admission from Sunofone that standard demolition explosives cannot "point to the crime of the century", so we won't be hearing anymore of that nonsense from him.
Pax Unum
LOL, now it's a fusion device at the WTC?... some people will believe 'anything'.
expo2
QUOTE(Pax Unum @ Dec 22 2006, 10:28 PM) [snapback]1471498[/snapback]
LOL, now it's a fusion device at the WTC?... some people will believe 'anything'.


what they believe is in their independant research and in this case Finnish Military Expert and German engineers, even if the whole entire world disagrees with the 'official theory' doesnt deter from the fact that its good to see the open interest by neighboring countries.
aquatus1
I'm just looking at the very first picture on the source link, where they do a side-by-side comparison of the explosive debris clouds produced at the WTC collapse and at a nuclear test. The idea, I suppose, is to show people how similar the cloud patterns are. I can't help but wonder, however, if the fact that the center of the "explosion" of the WTC is hundreds of feet in thin air, and the center of the explosion of the nuclear device is several hundreds feet under the ground, would play a part in affecting the debris cloud. At first glance, it seems to be another one of those cases where the person presenting the argument (or comparison, in this case) is either intentionally deceiving their audience, hoping no one notices, or if they did not notice themselves, meaning their investigation missed a pretty vital element. Which would it be, deception, or ignorance? Does it matter, in terms of the value of the information? Both ways, it isn't too reliable.
expo2
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 23 2006, 12:17 AM) [snapback]1471592[/snapback]
I'm just looking at the very first picture on the source link, where they do a side-by-side comparison of the explosive debris clouds produced at the WTC collapse and at a nuclear test. The idea, I suppose, is to show people how similar the cloud patterns are. I can't help but wonder, however, if the fact that the center of the "explosion" of the WTC is hundreds of feet in thin air, and the center of the explosion of the nuclear device is several hundreds feet under the ground, would play a part in affecting the debris cloud. At first glance, it seems to be another one of those cases where the person presenting the argument (or comparison, in this case) is either intentionally deceiving their audience, hoping no one notices, or if they did not notice themselves, meaning their investigation missed a pretty vital element. Which would it be, deception, or ignorance? Does it matter, in terms of the value of the information? Both ways, it isn't too reliable.


You are speaking to which the Finnish military or german engineers? the german engineers dont make the explosive comparisons that you are claiming specifically:

http://home.debitel.net/user/andreas.bunkahle/defaulte.htm
aquatus1
QUOTE
You are speaking to which the Finnish military or german engineers? the german engineers dont make the explosive comparisons that you are claiming specifically:


...then why ask which one?

It's in the Finnish one that Sonofone got the article from. He sourced it at the base of his post.
Sunofone
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 22 2006, 06:17 PM) [snapback]1471592[/snapback]
I'm just looking at the very first picture on the source link-- Both ways, it isn't too reliable.

i guess when your consciencely trying not to see what is right in front of your eyes you may have missed it-- in case the obvious flew right over your head,which it always seems to do,ill explain it to you the hydrogen device WOULD have been placed in the sub-basement-- the purpose was to vaporize the 47 core box coulumns that you so anxiously forget about-- remeber the ones that eviscerate the nist and fema hypothesis'?-- also,who here has the credentials to challenge an expert in military munitions and their affects on structural variations?? the demolition is plain to see in every single video taken that day-- it is also crystal clear from the eyewitness testimony of firefighters and journalists alike what was being observed--the bush links to the bin ladens and the stand down of norad as well as the evacuation that took place when the rest of america was grounded are also cooberating motives pointing to treason--the absolut nails in the coffin though have to deal with the natural gas pipeline that haliburton got the no-bid contracts to build as soon as the afghan war commenced (just look at the location of our bases there in relation to the pipline) as well as the evidence that was destroyed concerning the goldman sachs gold stock price manipulation which implicated henry kissenger and the exxon mobile lawsuit which when compounded with the billions taken from tax payers for two illegal wars,the pipelines est 7 "T"rillion worth and the carte4 blanc the bush admin had to destroy our sovereignty which protects him from prosecution and you have an open and shut case that CANNOT be denied-- the truth will never die and the movement will only grow stronger-- whether you like it or not you will have to accept the truth one day-- any issues concerning the facts made above please feel free to challenge them
BZRK
QUOTE(Sunofone @ Dec 24 2006, 05:35 AM) [snapback]1472704[/snapback]
i guess when your consciencely trying not to see what is right in front of your eyes you may have missed it-- in case the obvious flew right over your head,which it always seems to do,ill explain it to you the hydrogen device WOULD have been placed in the sub-basement-- the purpose was to vaporize the 47 core box coulumns that you so anxiously forget about-- remeber the ones that eviscerate the nist and fema hypothesis'?-- also,who here has the credentials to challenge an expert in military munitions and their affects on structural variations?? the demolition is plain to see in every single video taken that day-- it is also crystal clear from the eyewitness testimony of firefighters and journalists alike what was being observed--the bush links to the bin ladens and the stand down of norad as well as the evacuation that took place when the rest of america was grounded are also cooberating motives pointing to treason--the absolut nails in the coffin though have to deal with the natural gas pipeline that haliburton got the no-bid contracts to build as soon as the afghan war commenced (just look at the location of our bases there in relation to the pipline) as well as the evidence that was destroyed concerning the goldman sachs gold stock price manipulation which implicated henry kissenger and the exxon mobile lawsuit which when compounded with the billions taken from tax payers for two illegal wars,the pipelines est 7 "T"rillion worth and the carte4 blanc the bush admin had to destroy our sovereignty which protects him from prosecution and you have an open and shut case that CANNOT be denied-- the truth will never die and the movement will only grow stronger-- whether you like it or not you will have to accept the truth one day-- any issues concerning the facts made above please feel free to challenge them


Its just really amazing how some people really accept the Governments official story and investigations into 9/11.

Its also amazing how till this day, Bush has banned any form of Independent Inquiry. If the facts and information provided by the US Governments investigation is correct then the Independent Inquiry should basically come to the same conclusion as the the Governments explanation and investigation, why not have an independent inquiry if there is nothing to hide?

Some sort of explosives were definately used in the WTC to bring down those towers, I can not see how 3 buildings on the same day fell due to fires, when in fact no building in history has ever collapsed due to fires weakening the buildings structure thus a collapse was imminent.

Sunofone keep up the good work. thumbsup.gif

Cheers

BZRK thumbsup.gif
aquatus1
QUOTE(Sunofone @ Dec 24 2006, 05:35 AM) [snapback]1472704[/snapback]
any issues concerning the facts made above please feel free to challenge them


Would that be because you cannot, for the life of yourself, figure out any way to answer the discrepencies about this latest cockamany theory you have presented?

Good luck supporting the notion that the WTC blast started anywhere other than at the impact site. Heck, even if it did, it doesn't compare to a blast buried hundreds of feet below the ground.
chris0871
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 24 2006, 02:38 PM) [snapback]1472935[/snapback]
Would that be because you cannot, for the life of yourself, figure out any way to answer the discrepencies about this latest cockamany theory you have presented?

Good luck supporting the notion that the WTC blast started anywhere other than at the impact site. Heck, even if it did, it doesn't compare to a blast buried hundreds of feet below the ground.


I have a question for you what was the motive from these 23 highjackers that attacked America why do they hate us?
aquatus1
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 04:12 PM) [snapback]1472976[/snapback]
I have a question for you what was the motive from these 23 highjackers that attacked America why do they hate us?


Possibly because in their childhood an American bumped one of them and spilled their ice cream.

Why they attacked is both irrelevant and uninteresting to me. The towers would have collapsed the exact same way, regardless of the personal motivations of the attackers.
chris0871
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 24 2006, 04:21 PM) [snapback]1472981[/snapback]
Possibly because in their childhood an American bumped one of them and spilled their ice cream.

Why they attacked is both irrelevant and uninteresting to me. The towers would have collapsed the exact same way, regardless of the personal motivations of the attackers.

we call them religious extrimists meaning they hate our way of life they hate our freedom . Look into Atta's past this man was no extrimist I smell CIA all over this **EDIT**. Do your home work. as far as the buildings do you really think some well known scientist is going to speek out against the official story do you know what would happen , these scientists know what they saw was impossible they are just afraid what will happen to them and there family if they even try to speak out .
What's important for all us believers is that we know what there spinning is bull and at least we can try to protect our friends and family from these corupt basterds .

stay away from main stream news it sucks the other day they had a 40 minute press conference with trump on this usa pagent and you wonder why the news agencies are losing there ratings .

Also stay away from drug prescribing doctors there just as bad.

America I believe is starting to awake slowly I believe a new age is starting to happen kind of like a new Renaissance, these are very exciting times should make for some great tv.

**Chris, this is a family forum. Foul language is not tolerated.**
Lilly
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 04:49 PM) [snapback]1473009[/snapback]
Do your home work. as far as the buildings do you really think some well known scientist is going to speek out against the official story do you know what would happen , these scientists know what they saw was impossible they are just afraid what will happen to them and there family if they even try to speak out .


What about the scientists that live in countries other than the USA? Do you think, for example, scientists in China fear "what will happen to them and their family" if they speak out and tell *the truth* about this? Do you have any proof that any scientists anywhere have, in fact, been threatened?

BTW, I've done my homework; I read up on what structural engineers say about buliding collapses. I asked my close friend (I'm originally from NY) what she witnessed (first hand) on 9/11, I studied up on Islamic extremist beliefs, then I arrived at my own conclusion. Basically, I thought for myself. I'd advise everyone else to do the same.

Remember, the old saw of being "sheeple" works both ways. linked-image
aquatus1
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 04:49 PM) [snapback]1473009[/snapback]
we call them religious extrimists meaning they hate our way of life they hate our freedom . Look into Atta's past this man was no extrimist I smell CIA all over this **EDIT**. Do your home work.[/b]


I said it before and I'll say it again. Not interested. It doesn't matter if it was CIA operatives, aliens in holographic ships, or Middle-Eastern terrorist avenging their ice cream. What the motive were, why whomever knocked down the towers, what they hated, loved, lived, or died for, is completly utterly, absolutely irrelevant. None of it is going to change how the towers fell.

QUOTE
as far as the buildings do you really think some well known scientist is going to speek out against the official story do you know what would happen , these scientists know what they saw was impossible they are just afraid what will happen to them and there family if they even try to speak out .
A single scientist wouldn't need to. Do you understand what a scientific journal is? A scientific journal is a working publication for the people who are actively in the field. The articles within it are not little entertainment sections, or tiny blurbs of interest. If something is published in a journal, it means that it is information that is of immediate and relevant interest to the people workin g in the field.

So, what does that mean in terms of the NIST report? What it means is that over 140,000 experts, 140,000 engineers, material scientists, architects, students, and everyone who has a working knowledge of civil engineering and subscribes to the journal has read the report and found it to be valid in content and conclusion. These are not armchair scientists. These are not kids on the internet re-repeating what they have seen on other websites. These are professionals who read, review, and most importantly, put into practice the information they find in the journal. You can't fool them, because even if they somehow miss all the lapses that people who know little to nothing about engineering say are so obvious, they will notice when they are working on a building and it falls down on them.

Whether you like it or not, the NIST report is valid. Whether it is correct or not, you can argue, but you cannot argue it is invalid, unless you wish to argue that you are correct, and 140,000+ experts in the field are not.

QUOTE
What's important for all us believers is that we know what there spinning is bull and at least we can try to protect our friends and family from these corupt basterds .
That's too bad. For me, what is important is being able to seperate belief from fact, and assumption from "knowledge". It is a dangerous thing to assume that you "Know" what is truth and what is lie. It leads to dogma, which is every bit as bad for believers as it is for deniers.

QUOTE
stay away from main stream news it sucks the other day they had a 40 minute press conference with trump on this usa pagent and you wonder why the news agencies are losing there ratings .
Irrelevant.

QUOTE
Also stay away from drug prescribing doctors there just as bad.
Sorry, but after having asked my doctor as many questions as I needed to about the medication he prescribed, after having read the available data on it, and after having verified the results for myself, I have found him to be credible in his knowledge, and able to clearly and throughly explain the field he speaks about. I can't say the same about many others hear, who just make general statements of blanket condemnation against entire fields without providing a single reason why their opinions should be given any sort of credibility.

QUOTE
America I believe is starting to awake slowly I believe a new age is starting to happen kind of like a new Renaissance, these are very exciting times should make for some great tv.


I agree completly, but I sincerely doubt we agree on what the conclusion will be.
chris0871
then what is on this audio?


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=83...q=911eyewitness
expo2
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 05:53 PM) [snapback]1473043[/snapback]


It means that some people are against Newton's 3 laws of motion
aquatus1
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 05:53 PM) [snapback]1473043[/snapback]
then what is on this audio?


Nothing that hasn't been addresed heaven only know's how many times. Why, did you spot something that would support the idea that a fusion bomb was used to demolish the WTC towers?
chris0871
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 24 2006, 06:42 PM) [snapback]1473074[/snapback]
Nothing that hasn't been addresed heaven only know's how many times. Why, did you spot something that would support the idea that a fusion bomb was used to demolish the WTC towers?

Never said fusion but i do detect some massive audible sounds before collapse or are you **EDIT**?

**Chris, read the PM I am sending you.**
Lilly
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 07:39 PM) [snapback]1473105[/snapback]
Never said fusion but i do detect some massive audible sounds before collapse or are you deaf as well as stupid?


A review of rule #6 seems to be in order (bolding is mine):

6. No flaming, flame baiting, mocking, verbal abuse or trolling
Members who derail topics with flaming, trolling or the instigation of 'flame wars' will be removed from the forum. We ask that members stay open minded about opposing viewpoints. Don't ask for other people's opinions on something if the only opinion that matters to you is your own. Similarly, avoid being offensive towards other members that you disagree with; attack the viewpoint being presented, not the person who holds that view. Claiming that you 'know' you are right about something and that everyone who disagrees with you is 'ignorant' achieves nothing and is a close minded mentality that we strongly discourage in threads.

Also, aquatus1 is a moderator (a wise person would keep this in mind).


MID
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 02:39 PM) [snapback]1473105[/snapback]
Never said fusion but i do detect some massive audible sounds before collapse or are you deaf as well as stupid?



chris0871....


This thread was about a fusion device being used.
You have taken it a bit off topic with your diatribes regarding motives, and the lather you seem to be stirring in your recent string of posts is getting a little disturbing.

However, you should realize that Lilly is correct in what she has posted regarding your conduct here.
Aquatus is a moderator...and is sea god with a three pronged fork in his hand rolleyes.gif .

He doesn't use it much...but you may be looking at a stab in the rear if you don't re-consider comments such as the one above...

Hopefully, you're not already too late.
chris0871
QUOTE(MID @ Dec 24 2006, 09:15 PM) [snapback]1473156[/snapback]
chris0871....
This thread was about a fusion device being used.
You have taken it a bit off topic with your diatribes regarding motives, and the lather you seem to be stirring in your recent string of posts is getting a little disturbing.

However, you should realize that Lilly is correct in what she has posted regarding your conduct here.
Aquatus is a moderator...and is sea god with a three pronged fork in his hand rolleyes.gif .

He doesn't use it much...but you may be looking at a stab in the rear if you don't re-consider comments such as the one above...

Hopefully, you're not already too late.


Sorry for the comment but when I hear and see this video My blood boils and something just comes out of me like the reality of it all and it makes me wonder if more people would really look at the real evidence thats right in front of there eyes and ask the question just what are we hearing and seeing before the collapse ?

What are these loud sounds traveling across the water that show up on Richard Segals camera caused from before the collapse?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=26...tness&hl=en

So answer the question and stop trying to change the subject because I called someone stupid , What are we ten?



Bizeebutt
Ok, I'm just as upset about this event as anyone... but why does it have to be a conspiracy? I am an architect, and have worked directly with an architect who was involved in the design of the World Trade Centers. It clearly was a structural failure... a failure in the design only because it was never designed with the intention of withstanding an impact from a full sized passenger plane. This event removed, those two towers would have stood for centuries without event.

We all may have issues with our government but you must look back into the history of any country... In times of great economic growth, very few believe the government is conspiring against the people (this only makes sense because people are happy)... but in times of economic pitfalls, people easily succumb to the ideas that the government is conspiring against the common good.

chris0871
QUOTE(Bizeebutt @ Dec 24 2006, 10:43 PM) [snapback]1473194[/snapback]
Ok, I'm just as upset about this event as anyone... but why does it have to be a conspiracy? I am an architect, and have worked directly with an architect who was involved in the design of the World Trade Centers. It clearly was a structural failure... a failure in the design only because it was never designed with the intention of withstanding an impact from a full sized passenger plane. This event removed, those two towers would have stood for centuries without event.

We all may have issues with our government but you must look back into the history of any country... In times of great economic growth, very few believe the government is conspiring against the people (this only makes sense because people are happy)... but in times of economic pitfalls, people easily succumb to the ideas that the government is conspiring against the common good.

I never said they were evil if they were evil they would of hit the towers at 3:00 pm but I do believe they are willing to make some people expendable to them the ends justify the means.
And watch the link in the post listen carefully try not to barf.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=26...tness&hl=en
Bizeebutt
I did listen to it... and it sounds to me like people screaming because they are afraid for their lives... is this not to be expected as buildings are crashing down around them? What else would you expect?
chris0871
QUOTE(Bizeebutt @ Dec 24 2006, 10:59 PM) [snapback]1473207[/snapback]
I did listen to it... and it sounds to me like people screaming because they are afraid for their lives... is this not to be expected as buildings are crashing down around them? What else would you expect?

omg your kidding right I'm talking about the thunder like sound before the collapse .
aquatus1
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 10:13 PM) [snapback]1473176[/snapback]
Sorry for the comment but when I hear and see this video My blood boils and something just comes out of me like the reality of it all and it makes me wonder if more people would really look at the real evidence thats right in front of there eyes and ask the question just what are we hearing and seeing before the collapse ?


It is an emotional subject, I think everyone will agree on that. The thing of it is, though, that not everyone allows themselves to be led soley by emotional arguments. Your entire assumption here is that anyone who is disagreeing with you has never looked at any of the evidence you have presented. Has it occured to you that others have looked at it, and found it wanting? Do you think there might be a chance that maybe other people, with different sorts of knowledge, abilities, and training, might have a different, and completly valid, point of view that is different that yours?

QUOTE
So answer the question and stop trying to change the subject because I called someone stupid , What are we ten?
Chris, the person who insults others for no reason other than having a differing opinion is the one acting childish. An adult does not pay lip service to an apology, and then pretend the insult never existed.

QUOTE(Bizeebutt @ Dec 24 2006, 10:43 PM) [snapback]1473194[/snapback]

Ok, I'm just as upset about this event as anyone... but why does it have to be a conspiracy? I am an architect, and have worked directly with an architect who was involved in the design of the World Trade Centers. It clearly was a structural failure... a failure in the design only because it was never designed with the intention of withstanding an impact from a full sized passenger plane. This event removed, those two towers would have stood for centuries without event.


Well, true, but let's qualify it a bit. The building was not designed to withstand an impact from an airliner, true, but it was later calculated to be able to survive such an impact and remain standing. In the case of the collapse, it wasn't solely the impact that led to the failure, but also other factors, the main one being the fire that severely weakened the remaining structure. No one factor acted alone; without the fire, the buildings would likely have remained standing, and without the impact, the fire would not have compromised the structure to the extent that it did.
MID
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 05:13 PM) [snapback]1473176[/snapback]
Sorry for the comment but when I hear and see this video My blood boils and something just comes out of me like the reality of it all and it makes me wonder if more people would really look at the real evidence thats right in front of there eyes and ask the question just what are we hearing and seeing before the collapse ?

What are these loud sounds traveling across the water that show up on Richard Segals camera caused from before the collapse?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=26...tness&hl=en

So answer the question and stop trying to change the subject because I called someone stupid , What are we ten?



Relax, and grow up while you're at it.
You said you're sorry for the comment, and then you make another one.

Your blood boils because you don't know what you're seeing or hearing, and you think it's some sort of bomb or something. That is your conspiracy mindset at work, something based upon emotion rather than facts gathered through legitimate investigation and knowledge (we see it all the time concerning Apollo).

You're asking me what that first noise, about 5 seconds before the North Tower begins it's fall, is?

I don't know.

Obviously, the South Tower already collapsed, and if you know anything about what happened, you'll know that there was smoke and dust everywhere for blocks already after that happened, and there were additional collapses of structure that was left standing, all of which caused explosion like sounds as it fell.

So, That pre-collapse explosion could've been one of them, or it could've been the sound from interior collapse in the North Tower. This is just me speculating...based upon a technical background, of course, but I'm not a structural or mechanical or architectural engineer. Obviously, you aren't either, otherwise, your inference here would never be made.

You're seeing nothing but a video of the WTC 1 collapse, and of course it has an inset to show what appears to be a slight brightening between two waterfront buildings which is alleged to concur with the pre-collapse sound you hear. But it is undetermined what that is...structural engineers may know precisely what that was, but I don't...

You don't either, but you seem to be implying that this was a deliberate explosion...a building detonation. That idea is so far off the edge that it doesn't bear addressing anymore.

The professionals, people who build these types of things, and who analyze structures and materials, know what happened there. The reports of the tower collapses are accepted universally by such professionals, which number in the hundreds of thousands.

Instead of asking questions about this video, and getting angry with people of technical background who simply point out the irrationality and inefficacy of your arguments, why don't you just come out and say what you're thinking, and we'll stop arguing about the tenuous evidence of some vast conspiracy by the Government to destroy undetermined thousands of American lives, the infrastructure of a major American city, and potentially the financial infrastructure of the nation in one fell swoop...

We'll leave such discussion to the ya hoos who cater to that sort of bilge.









Sunofone
QUOTE(Bizeebutt @ Dec 24 2006, 04:43 PM) [snapback]1473194[/snapback]
Ok, I'm just as upset about this event as anyone... but why does it have to be a conspiracy? a failure in the design only because it was never designed with the intention of withstanding an impact from a full sized passenger plane.

it has to be a conspiracy because the administration involved has financial family ties to the rise of the third reich--prescott bush had millions seized in correspondence with the trading with the enemy act ans his current predecesor "w" was an admitted member of skull and bones a yale fraternity instituted for the sole purpose of destroying american soveirgnty through corruption and networking and to usher in a global government-- you are either seriously naive or malicious in your feeble attempt at spin-- you are completely wrong in the assertion that the buildings were not designed to widthstand an impact from a passenger plane-- both the architect minoru yamasaki and the contruction manager frank demartini both asserted their unwaivering conviction that the towers would not only have widthstood an impact from the largest passenger plane of the time but "multiple" impacts and likened the scenario to pencils impaling a screen door


QUOTE(Bizeebutt @ Dec 24 2006, 04:43 PM) [snapback]1473194[/snapback]
We all may have issues with our government but you must look back into the history of any country... In times of great economic growth, very few believe the government is conspiring against the people (this only makes sense because people are happy)... but in times of economic pitfalls, people easily succumb to the ideas that the government is conspiring against the common good.

again in this point you are completely oblivious to the truth in the situations you brought up yourself -- history tells us all we need to know about the the perps family ambitions as well as that america was founded in defiance to the queen and the taxes of surfdom-- history is filled with false flag terror operations and you have to realise,when examining the facts,that it is also written by the winners-- in examination of the first point it is important to watch this video as it details the official examination of the dust which cannot be denied--
9/11 REVISITED v2

next well discuss the ejecting of debri,images of anomylous high velocity ejections of gas,pools of molten steel in the basements that did not cool for 100 days with a constant spray of water,the seismograph readings and the missing 400,000 gallons of water from the towers rooftop sprinkler resivoirs
chris0871
THe explosions heard from 911 eyewitness were recorded from the beginning even before the first tower fell there were very loud explosions .It would be very easy to analyze the sound recording from this tape to see if it was a hoax.

When the building is falling you can hear the sound fluctuations so we know they are definetly explosions.


Have a listen.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4...tness&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...tness&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5...tness&hl=en
aquatus1
An explosion does not mean that there were explosives. Explosions happen in fires. They are not only not anomalous, they are expected.

But that's going to be it from me for today. I refuse to talk about these things on Christmas Day. Happy holidays, everyone!
chris0871
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 25 2006, 06:13 AM) [snapback]1473373[/snapback]
An explosion does not mean that there were explosives. Explosions happen in fires. They are not only not anomalous, they are expected.

But that's going to be it from me for today. I refuse to talk about these things on Christmas Day. Happy holidays, everyone!

Happy HO HO
Sunofone
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 24 2006, 05:25 PM) [snapback]1473223[/snapback]
omg your kidding right I'm talking about the thunder like sound before the collapse .

not kidding ....denying-- that video you posted was excellent in testifying to the fact that a demolition took place-- here is firefighter eyewitness testimony to the events closer to the detonations-- note how the video is further backed by conclusive decriptions that leave no room for debate--
**********************************************************
QUOTE
Firefighters shocked by a loud explosion.
linked-image

QUOTE
"At 10:30 I tried to leave the building, but as I got outside I heard a second explosion ... And then a fire marshal came in and said we had to leave, because if there was a third explosion this building might not last."
linked-image

QUOTE
"We were trying to get some of the people out, but then there was secondary explosions and then subsequent collapses."
linked-image

QUOTE
"As we were getting our gear on and making our way to the stairway, there was a heavy duty explosion."
linked-image

QUOTE
"We really never even got that close to the building. The explosion blew and it knocked everybody over"
linked-image
Sunofone
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 25 2006, 12:13 AM) [snapback]1473373[/snapback]
An explosion does not mean that there were explosives. Explosions happen in fires. They are not only not anomalous, they are expected.

But that's going to be it from me for today. I refuse to talk about these things on Christmas Day. Happy holidays, everyone!

ok then by default you should be able to view some of the hours of video tape of the madrid windsor building that burned for well over 18 hours on multiple floors and demonstrate some similar audible explosions--
remeber this fire?
linked-image
linked-image
after still standing
linked-image
a few more facts to ponder while debating the absolute absurdity of the official lie
*****************************************************************
QUOTE
Steel Versus Steel-Reinforced Concrete

In fact, comparisons between the Windsor tower and the WTC Towers are limited because of the very different structures of these buildings. The Twin Towers and Building 7 were both 100% steel-framed, with large wide-flange columns and box columns, some measuring over four feet wide and fabricated of steel up to five inches thick. Severe fires in other skyscrapers which, like the WTC Towers, were 100% steel-framed, have not produced even partial collapses.

In contrast to the WTC Towers, the Windsor building was framed primarily in steel-reinforced concrete, with columns of concrete reinforced by thin sections of rebar. 3 The concrete pillars in the Windsor building are clearly visible in the photographs showing the intact core exposed by the collapsed facade. The very light construction of the perimeter, described below, makes it clear that the core was the main load-bearing component of the building.

Before examining the partial collapse of the Windsor building more closely, we note that steel-framed and steel-reinforced-concrete-framed structures behave very differently in fires.

* Steel is a good conductor and concrete is a poor conductor of heat. Thus in a fire, a steel frame will conduct heat away from the hotspots into the larger structure. As long as the fire does not consume the larger structure, this heat conductivity will keep the temperatures of the frame well below the fire temperatures. The same is not true of steel-reinforced-concrete structures, since concrete is not a good thermal conductor, and the thermal conductivity of the rebar inside the concrete is limited by its small mass and the embedding matrix of concrete.
* Fires can cause spalling of concrete, but not of steel. This is because concrete has a small percentage of latent moisture, which is converted to steam by heat. Thus, a large fire can gradually erode a concrete structure to the point of collapse, whereas a fire can only threaten a steel-framed structure if it elevates steel temperatures to such an extent that it causes failures.
MID
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 25 2006, 01:08 AM) [snapback]1473368[/snapback]
THe explosions heard from 911 eyewitness were recorded from the beginning even before the first tower fell there were very loud explosions .It would be very easy to analyze the sound recording from this tape to see if it was a hoax.

When the building is falling you can hear the sound fluctuations so we know they are definetly explosions.
Have a listen.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4...tness&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...tness&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5...tness&hl=en



There was no hoax in the sound recordings made of these events.

As aquatus said:

QUOTE
An explosion does not mean that there were explosives. Explosions happen in fires. They are not only not anomalous, they are expected.


Another thing to remember is that an event like this has never been observed before.
When was the last time that two loaded 767s crashed into the upper floors of two of the tallest buildings in the world?
When was the last time we've ever seen destruction of such a building at all?
Do we have any data on what it is like to destroy buildings that are over 1000 feet tall and weigh about 1 million tons in total?

Never has anyone seen or experienced this, and of course, we have no data on such a thing, save what we could gather from this singular unique event in human history.

People's impressions of what they saw or heard are all based upon nothing but immediate observations. No one could make an engineeering assessment of the noises they heard, or the shock waves they felt, or the explosions that obviously occurred.

But one thing is certain.
This massive fire, causing catastrophic damage to a couple of the worlds largest buildings, damaged the structure, and the infrastructure of the buildings (the menagerie of things inside). There were electrical transformers, plumbing on a massive scale, perhaps various fuels in tankage at various locations, chemicals stored, gas lines, and such things, with a massive degrading and burning structure falling externally, and internally. There are bound to be explosive noises, and certainly some full out explosions, which are common in fires, and which have nothing to do with explosive devices.

Speculation about explosive devices being set off deliberately is foolhardy, unsubstantiated, and quite frankly ridiculous.

Sunofone
QUOTE(MID @ Dec 25 2006, 01:45 PM) [snapback]1473603[/snapback]
There are bound to be explosive noises, and certainly some full out explosions, which are common in fires, and which have nothing to do with explosive devices.

Speculation about explosive devices being set off deliberately is foolhardy, unsubstantiated, and quite frankly ridiculous.


no.gif
QUOTE
ok then by default you should be able to view some of the hours of video tape of the madrid windsor building that burned for well over 18 hours on multiple floors and demonstrate some similar audible explosions--


whats ridiculous is the outright denial of what is right before your eyes-- the family ties,the financial motives,eye witness testimony, video evidence and HISTORY
chris0871
QUOTE(Sunofone @ Dec 25 2006, 08:01 PM) [snapback]1473611[/snapback]
no.gif
whats ridiculous is the outright denial of what is right before your eyes-- the family ties,the financial motives,eye witness testimony, video evidence and HISTORY

The Truth of the matter is nobody wants to think about the unthinkable I cant tell you how long I looked over this evidence and not want to except it you have to be a very strong person inside to handle this kind of reality but I have always searched my whole life for truth whether it's religion or science this is really what happened and now living with this information will be the purpose of all our lives.

But remember this didn't start with 911 if you look back in history many major wars were created this way this is just one more piece of the puzzle.
BZRK
QUOTE(chris0871 @ Dec 26 2006, 06:01 AM) [snapback]1473824[/snapback]
The Truth of the matter is nobody wants to think about the unthinkable I cant tell you how long I looked over this evidence and not want to except it you have to be a very strong person inside to handle this kind of reality but I have always searched my whole life for truth whether it's religion or science this is really what happened and now living with this information will be the purpose of all our lives.

But remember this didn't start with 911 if you look back in history many major wars were created this way this is just one more piece of the puzzle.


Chris your absolutely right.

Problem, Reaction, Solution Paradigm:


1) A government creates and takes advantage of a problem or crisis (terrorism is the perfect example)
2) After news media repetition, the population reacts by asking the government to fix the problem
3) The government finally offers the solution, which was planned long before the crisis was created

Historical Evidence of Problem Reaction Solution
  1. Nero Burnt Rome, Blamed It on the Christians and Then Savagely Butchered Them.
  2. The USS Maine Sank in Havana Harbor Launching the US into the Spanish American War .
  3. Stock Market Crash of 1929. The crash of 1929 lead to HJR 192, which made the possession of gold illegal and established the IOU's known as Federal Reserve Notes (in 1933).
  4. Adolf Hitler was elected Chancellor (President) and then Burnt the Reichstag (German Parliament) Building. He Then Declared Himself Furor (Dictator) and Promised Utopia. Hitler Declared Martial Law and Suspended All Basic Human Rights.
  5. Attack on Pearl Harbor - actual recordings of intercepted diplomatic communications, declassified government documents, archival footage and interviews with diplomats and spies from around the world show President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Administration had prior knowledge of attacks. The attack allowed Roosevelt to take the US into the War.
  6. In 1962, the government wanted to change public opinion to create a pretext for war with Cuba. The Joint Chiefs of Staff created a plan that they named "Operation Northwoods", to commit a series of terrorist acts against America and blame it on the Cuban government. One of the scenarios included blowing up civilian airplanes and ships.
  7. The 1993 Bombing of the World Trade Center caused by terrorists hired by the FBI. Emad Salem an FBI "informant", recorded his meeting with the FBI. Salem asserts that the original plan was to have the plotters build the bomb using a harmless powder instead of actual explosive, but that an FBI supervisor decided that a real bomb should be constructed instead. The van with the explosives was parked in the wrong spot with 12 people were killed.
  8. In 1995, Bombing of Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. It killed killing 168 people. It was the largest domestic terrorist attack in the history of the United States before 9/11. Films by U.S. journalist Alex Jones allege that the US government was involved in orchestrating the bombing, to provide a pretext for subsequent "antiterrorist" laws. In 1996, Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act was introduced.
  9. In 2001, The Terrorist attacks on 9/11, to create a pretext for war with Iraq.
  10. Explosions in London - A pretext for UK involvment in iraq
  11. The Three Hotel Bombings in Jordon on 11/9/05 - Evidence of Israeli citizens being evacuated before attacks, 3 High ranking Palestenian Government officials die in the attacks, Chinese military personal also died in the blast.Israel considers the Chinese support to Palestinians is a threat to its interests that must put an end to. The Amman bombing was meant to be a warning message to the Chinese. To kill two birds in one stone and to direct the blame towards terrorist Al-Zarqawi, Israeli operatives targeted not just the Palestinian and the Chinese officials, but also innocent civilians to hide the real target of its operation.
I leave you with the following quote:

"The Party seeks power entirely for its for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness; only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that, We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes a revolution in order to establish a dictatorship." 1984 by George Orwell.

Cheers

BZRK thumbsup.gif
robbo1331
its been 6 months since i last visited this site and my god sunofone is still at it, whats happened mate has everything else u used to spout been rubbished so now u've come up with this, i thought it was thermite or explosives or missiles i could go on, have a look at these links (i doubt u'll look at any as none of these fulfil ur fantasies) and they will explain to u vary clearly what happened.

http://www.debunking911.com/links.htm

Advanced Fusion device at WTC and u talk about reasonable logical thinkers get a grip of urself

oh and ur running out of ideas also in ur title u say "evidence hidden in plain view" this rings a bell to me anyone remember "in plane site"
Redtail
QUOTE(Sunofone @ Dec 25 2006, 07:08 PM) [snapback]1473586[/snapback]
not kidding ....denying-- that video you posted was excellent in testifying to the fact that a demolition took place-- here is firefighter eyewitness testimony to the events closer to the detonations-- note how the video is further backed by conclusive decriptions that leave no room for debate--
**********************************************************



And which one of those firefighters could walk up to and ask "Were the towers brought down by controlled Demolition?" and they would answer yes? Which firefighters said "The buildings were brought down by bombs/charges/CD?

Here is an actual controlled demolition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-WvQbFMIWU

Very different from the WTC. IF it was in fact a CD then why did NONE of the audio around the towers pick it up?
expo2
QUOTE(Bizeebutt @ Dec 24 2006, 10:59 PM) [snapback]1473207[/snapback]
and it sounds to me like


I listened to it as well and it seems to me like you are being partial and selective.
Sunofone
QUOTE(robbo1331 @ Dec 26 2006, 07:43 PM) [snapback]1474537[/snapback]
its been 6 months since i last visited this site and my god sunofone is still at it, whats happened mate has everything else u used to spout been rubbished so now u've come up with this, i thought it was thermite or explosives or missiles i could go on, have a look at these links (i doubt u'll look at any as none of these fulfil ur fantasies) and they will explain to u vary clearly what happened.

http://www.debunking911.com/links.htm

Advanced Fusion device at WTC and u talk about reasonable logical thinkers get a grip of urself

oh and ur running out of ideas also in ur title u say "evidence hidden in plain view" this rings a bell to me anyone remember "in plane site"

you know i usually dont reply to ignorant statements completely oblivious to the facts being discussed but just to demonstrate how preposterous you bogus link is ill give every one a preview-- first i clicked on your main link which led to a page of more links of which "debunking the 9/11 movement" caught my eye-- from there i chose an article titled "iron burns" where the guy basically tries to disprove a physics professors theories concerning molten pools of steel with the brilliant deduction that the sulfur gas released from the burning drywall was enough to rapidly "rust" the 47 core box coulmns allowing them to deteriorate to the pools of molten steel found 6 weeks after the collapse-- if any one doesnt believe me ill include the links as i followed them not including the first one and a few quotes-- this is so ridiculous i am not so sure i want to waste my time investigating the explantion for the initial failure of the box columns--why dont you enlighten us robbo as to the theories contained within your link for cause of the core column failures--

link 1

link 2

QUOTE
Professor Jones assumes that all the carbonaceous "combustible" matter in the "piles" would have burned away long before the time that the red-hot and molten iron was discovered (weeks after the collapse of the WTC towers). Perhaps it did, by weeks after the collapse. But Professor Jones obviously does not comprehend that the hot, red-hot and molten IRON IS COMBUSTIBLE matter.
QUOTE
The Truth is that: HOT STEEL WILL CONTINUE TO UNDERGO EXOTHERMIC OXIDATION REACTIONS WHILE EXPOSED TO AIR, CAUSING IRON TO INCREASE ITS TEMPERATURE UNTIL IT MELTS, FORMING POOLS OF MOLTEN IRON.

Professor Jones' comments and conjectures about the origin of the alleged molten iron found within the three huge piles of combustible matter burning after the collapse of the WTC towers, distinctly prove that Professor Jones is oblivious of the fact that Iron Burns in air.



QUOTE
In other words, Sulfur Dioxide gas (e.g., from decomposing Gypsum wallboard) spontaneously reacts (combines) with iron metal (cold or hot), turning it into iron sulfides and iron oxides (i.e. burning the iron).
QUOTE

For practical purposes, all this means that a huge pile of iron beams (e.g., mixed in with tons of other materials initially burning) can itself begin to burn like huge iron logs in a pile furnace, and there is no reason not to expect this system to reach a temperature high enough to melt iron.


never mind the fact that the iron in question has been combined to form an alloy known as steel w00t.gif what a joke
i dont expect you to research your own bogus link so i will expose its lunacy at a later date
expo2
QUOTE(Sunofone @ Dec 27 2006, 05:01 AM) [snapback]1474693[/snapback]
you know i usually dont reply to ignorant statements completely oblivious to the facts being discussed but just to demonstrate how preposterous you bogus link is ill give every one a preview-- first i clicked on your main link which led to a page of more links of which "debunking the 9/11 movement" caught my eye-- from there i chose an article titled "iron burns" where the guy basically tries to disprove a physics professors theories concerning molten pools of steel with the brilliant deduction that the sulfur gas released from the burning drywall was enough to rapidly "rust" the 47 core box coulmns allowing them to deteriorate to the pools of molten steel found 6 weeks after the collapse-- if any one doesnt believe me ill include the links as i followed them not including the first one and a few quotes-- this is so ridiculous i am not so sure i want to waste my time investigating the explantion for the initial failure of the box columns--why dont you enlighten us robbo as to the theories contained within your link for cause of the core column failures--

link 1

link 2
never mind the fact that the iron in question has been combined to form an alloy known as steel w00t.gif what a joke
i dont expect you to research your own bogus link so i will expose its lunacy at a later date


Take care sunofone, im outa here for good and you should already know why.
robbo1331
QUOTE(Sunofone @ Dec 27 2006, 05:01 AM) [snapback]1474693[/snapback]
you know i usually dont reply to ignorant statements completely oblivious to the facts being discussed but just to demonstrate how preposterous you bogus link is ill give every one a preview-- first i clicked on your main link which led to a page of more links of which "debunking the 9/11 movement" caught my eye-- from there i chose an article titled "iron burns" where the guy basically tries to disprove a physics professors theories concerning molten pools of steel with the brilliant deduction that the sulfur gas released from the burning drywall was enough to rapidly "rust" the 47 core box coulmns allowing them to deteriorate to the pools of molten steel found 6 weeks after the collapse-- if any one doesnt believe me ill include the links as i followed them not including the first one and a few quotes-- this is so ridiculous i am not so sure i want to waste my time investigating the explantion for the initial failure of the box columns--why dont you enlighten us robbo as to the theories contained within your link for cause of the core column failures--

link 1

link 2
never mind the fact that the iron in question has been combined to form an alloy known as steel w00t.gif what a joke
i dont expect you to research your own bogus link so i will expose its lunacy at a later date



there is no enlightening u sunofall u say one thing and when it gets discredited u come up with another crackpot idea, the reason i first got interested in this subject was afetr watching alex jones road to tyranny and martial law i was convinced it was a controlled demolition and the goverment did it, but the more i looked into it(with an open mind unlike some) the more i realised what a fool i had been and how easily it is for people to distort the facts and take quotes out of context. anyway i didn't look at all the links (9-11 myths & the sight the links were from seem to cover it) and i didn't come on here for a debate i've waisted far to much time going round in circles with u people, i just wanted people who havn't been on this site for long to realise that U will go along with anything as long as it leads to an inside job. anyway got to go now i'll come back to see if u reply to this post but after that i will leave it a while cause that was hilarious to see ur post about fusion device i wonder what u will come up with nxt?
Aztec Warrior
Does anyone know the smallest "hydrogen device" ever detonated?

Anyone, Bueller....Bueller...


Does anyone really think a nuclear bomb without radiation only blew up a few buildings? This tread is dead! yes.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.