M
member 1013
Guest
Steel would never melt - some idiot said this to me.
That's why we pull I-beams out of the ground
That's why we pull I-beams out of the ground
British brothers and sisters, y'all wearing poppies or nah?
- Thread starter Chief
- Start date
M
member 1013
Guest
The guys arguing the actual science behind that collapse of the buildings have been debunked so many times over the years, they just refuse to acknowledge that the peer reviewed science proved them wrong.
It's like climate change deniers, they have made up their mind and they are smarter than everyone else.
M
member 1013
Guest
Also this was a cursory google search, the research is not hard to find.
Of course to the conspiracy theorists, this peer reviewed research that architects and engineers reference every day when designing large towers, is LIES!
Of course to the conspiracy theorists, this peer reviewed research that architects and engineers reference every day when designing large towers, is LIES!
M
member 1013
Guest
He is a decent guy, but I won't loose any sleep over that. Hopefully he still likes me though. I like everyone!
M
member 1013
Guest
Now as for if it was a False flag operation?
I hope not.
But the planes took down the towers.
I hope not.
But the planes took down the towers.
We've seen spectacular high rises fire in Shanghai, Beijing, Dubai, Moscow. None of them collapsed. I guess Americans build shoddy buildings eh? In fact the world trade centre in 1975 suffered a much worse fire and there was no serious damage to the building
This 110-story steel-framed office building suffered a fire on the 11th floor on February 13, 1975.
The fire started at approximately 11:45 P.M. in a furnished office on the 11th floor and spread through the corridors toward the main open office area.
So, this was a very serious fire which spread over some 65 per cent of the eleventh floor (the core plus half the office area) in the very same building that supposedly "collapsed" on 9/11 due to a similar, or lesser, fire. This fire also spread to a number of other floors. And although it lasted over 3 hours, it caused no serious structural damage and the trusses survived the fires without replacement and supported the building for many, many more years after the fires were put out.
It should be emphasized that the North Tower suffered no serious structural damage in this fire. In particular, none of the trusses needed to be replaced. So if the same building didn't collapse back then, how come in 2001 it couldn't withstand a much smaller fire?
You're so certain that it was planes and not bombs right?
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CtkWNHSG3MY
The whole lobby is blown to pieces before the collapse....
What about this guy who was trapped in WTC 7 and was hit by an explosion obviously before the building collapsed? Is he lying too?
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5LO5V2CJpzI
This guy went 'missing' after this video went viral
It just is..
I can find it, can I get a link? I'm ready to watch it now
Yeah the after-hours 'security' in the building is a major overlooked part of the puzzle imo.
I heard that MARVIN BUSH was in charge of such operations prior to 9/11 (or was involved in the companies who got the contract or something like that...) if this is true it should be a major red flag.
The notion that NIST and the 9/11 Commission both did not even consider the POSSIBILITY of controlled demo is outright criminal, there is so much evidence to suggest it, or at least warrant some looking into.
Thanks mate
They did that when they built the towers, not well, but they were fire treated..
M
member 1013
Guest
I posted many scientific models that counteract your arguments. Please read them.
If you don't understand that the plane's themselves cause the structural damage which made the frame of the building susceptible to collapse, not the actual fire, then I don't know what to say to you.
Very emotional arguments you made though brother
M
member 1013
Guest
Yes I am saying since that the industry has made massive advancements in fire treating post 9/11...
Building 7 was not hit by a plane.
M
member 1013
Guest
Dude, read the links I
A third building, World Trade Center 7, fell eight hours after the others. Scientists explained that this happened because of fires that ignited in the building upon the collapse of WTC 1, but some conspiracy theorists take it as further proof that the impacts of the hijacked airplanes weren't what brought any of the buildings down.
Simensen says his theory does not challenge the accepted scientific explanation of the collapse of WTC7.
"The official governmental report said the collapse [of World Trade Center 1 and 2] was due to overheating steel bars in the buildings and did not mention anything about explosions. Their theory … can be used to explain why WTC7 … collapsed. This collapse took place after eight hours of fire and was much slower than the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2," Simensen wrote.
The third tower
A third building, World Trade Center 7, fell eight hours after the others. Scientists explained that this happened because of fires that ignited in the building upon the collapse of WTC 1, but some conspiracy theorists take it as further proof that the impacts of the hijacked airplanes weren't what brought any of the buildings down.
Simensen says his theory does not challenge the accepted scientific explanation of the collapse of WTC7.
"The official governmental report said the collapse [of World Trade Center 1 and 2] was due to overheating steel bars in the buildings and did not mention anything about explosions. Their theory … can be used to explain why WTC7 … collapsed. This collapse took place after eight hours of fire and was much slower than the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2," Simensen wrote.
M
member 1013
Guest
^But of course that guy's a schill...
Dick Cheney stand down orders. This man and his statement was never mentioned in the NIST report
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RRJAI4-e7Xw
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RRJAI4-e7Xw
M
member 1013
Guest
I'm not debating the general premise it could have been an inside job, I'm just saying the scientific research on what happened to the actual buildings is there and has been for years. 9/11 has brought about a lot of changes in engineering and building material technology.
Maybe someone could explain this to me just on a basic logic level. I've seen all the documentaries, I know all the theories because I was a big conspiracy guy when I was younger. I just want to ask this to the Truthers.
For the sake of argument, let us grant the facts that the government wanted the middle east war badly and they were willing to act unethically to get into it (including perpetrating a false flag and potentially spilling innocent American blood).
What's the logic behind undertaking such an intricate conspiracy involving so many moving parts and so many individuals that would have to be party to murdering thousands of Americans, when the result of justifying a war could be done in much simpler ways? Ways that wouldn't make the president and all his men look like they failed to keep America safe?
The average Joe has no idea what the C.I.A does. Couldn't they have falsified some intelligence about potential terrorist activities? Maybe bought off the press to support the war?
And question 2, why is it that the same government that perpetrated this GENIUS, highly detailed conspiracy false flag... just threw their hands up in the air and said "whoopsie" when they couldn't find the WMD's they were searching for? I mean to pull off 9/11 as an inside job, you have to have so many people in league with you and you have to have so much power and ingenuity... yet you can't even falsify a report that you found a WMD to justify your war? Maybe planted a couple there?
For the sake of argument, let us grant the facts that the government wanted the middle east war badly and they were willing to act unethically to get into it (including perpetrating a false flag and potentially spilling innocent American blood).
What's the logic behind undertaking such an intricate conspiracy involving so many moving parts and so many individuals that would have to be party to murdering thousands of Americans, when the result of justifying a war could be done in much simpler ways? Ways that wouldn't make the president and all his men look like they failed to keep America safe?
The average Joe has no idea what the C.I.A does. Couldn't they have falsified some intelligence about potential terrorist activities? Maybe bought off the press to support the war?
And question 2, why is it that the same government that perpetrated this GENIUS, highly detailed conspiracy false flag... just threw their hands up in the air and said "whoopsie" when they couldn't find the WMD's they were searching for? I mean to pull off 9/11 as an inside job, you have to have so many people in league with you and you have to have so much power and ingenuity... yet you can't even falsify a report that you found a WMD to justify your war? Maybe planted a couple there?
Poppies are Pro-War Propaganda disguised as Anti-War Propaganda imho
It perpetuates the myth that the fallen soldiers were 'heroes' defending our 'freedoms' and that they were the 'good guys' who fought for us against the 'bad guys'. It glorifies war and promotes the myth that wars are just, and are done for the sake of humanity as opposed to any other possible nefarious agendas.
- This is all the same shite that is being used to justify wars and mass-murder still to this day.
Its hypocritical imo to wear one while our governments are still doing this shit. If I remember the fallen, I will remember them as the poor fucks who were tricked by propaganda into giving their lives so that rich fucks could play their grand chessboard with their blood. I mourn with pity not honor, these soldiers were just like you and me, only didn't have access to any information to investigate the claims that their conscription was built on.
It perpetuates the myth that the fallen soldiers were 'heroes' defending our 'freedoms' and that they were the 'good guys' who fought for us against the 'bad guys'. It glorifies war and promotes the myth that wars are just, and are done for the sake of humanity as opposed to any other possible nefarious agendas.
- This is all the same shite that is being used to justify wars and mass-murder still to this day.
Its hypocritical imo to wear one while our governments are still doing this shit. If I remember the fallen, I will remember them as the poor fucks who were tricked by propaganda into giving their lives so that rich fucks could play their grand chessboard with their blood. I mourn with pity not honor, these soldiers were just like you and me, only didn't have access to any information to investigate the claims that their conscription was built on.