So what did create the meteorite on 911?

Originally posted by timeless test
I've no idea where the original comment came from and it may have been no more that journalistic silliness.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Whilst it was hot, I doubt it was as hot as the inner earth. That's why IMO journalists can't be used as "evidence". That goes for both sides. Journalists make off the wall coments for the sake of ratings.

I believe one reason people think its an inside job is because the inside has been penetrated/comprimised at the highest levels by foriegn spies and agents, so it really would look like an inside job, although not the sort of inside job most people think!

so lets just assume it was a nuke and we have found our answer to the 'how', so 'who' do you think could of done it and 'why'?

Originally posted by Essedarius

Originally posted by bsbray11
I just think it's pointless to require a formal scientific analysis of things that come down to common sense.

Careful. The majority of the world's population thinks its common sense that the towers were brought down by a plane crash and fire.

I think you may need to rethink that statement my friend. If you do and you start to look at many of the polls on the subject you will find that your statement is true if you take the opposite. The majority of the world's population, especially those that have actually had access to seeing the events on TV, believe that something suspicious happened and that many of them think that either the government knows something or that they were directly involved.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by timeless test
I've no idea where the original comment came from and it may have been no more that journalistic silliness.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Whilst it was hot, I doubt it was as hot as the inner earth. That's why IMO journalists can't be used as "evidence". That goes for both sides. Journalists make off the wall coments for the sake of ratings.

Agreed then. However, I was not going off of anything stated in this thread. I was going off of what was told to the reporter in the video by the people showing it to him. They said that it was exposed to temperatures as hot as the inner earth. Yes, that can be vague but the obvious would mean the inner core because the inner earth is, in all reality, anything underneath the top layer of the earth. The temperatures near the surface can't melt steel so we MUST make the deduction that they were referring to the inner core.

Those temperatures are very hot. Much hotter than anything that should be caused by any type of building collapse.

Originally posted by dariousg
The majority of the world's population, especially those that have actually had access to seeing the events on TV, believe that something suspicious happened and that many of them think that either the government knows something or that they were directly involved.

I think that the population of people who are CURIOUS is quickly rising, but I still think it's far from being the MAJORITY.

Wikipedia, “9/11 Conspiracy Theories”
An October 2006 New York Times and CBS news poll showed that 28 percent believe members of the Bush Administration are mostly lying about "what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States.

Time Magazine, September 2006
A Scripps-Howard poll of 1,010 adults last month found that 36% of Americans consider it "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried out or carried out the attacks themselves.

Admittedly, both these polls are a little old...and polls can be very misleading if you don't know the group that was polled and the exact questions that were asked.

That said, I still think that there is a very large group of people who won't even take the time to respond to a 9/11 conspiracy poll because it is so absurd to them.

(Okay, so I know I just posited something that is completely unproveable and unargueable...guilty...but I do believe it to be true...)

I was at the WTC the next day, assisting with the cleanup with my const. crew, and actaully found a very similair 'meteorite'. It was actaully pretyt amazing, and unbelvibely heavy. Not everything, was destroyed though, i actually took a piece of paper out of it and it was fully intact, save a few burn amrks, and u could read the type on it. Nuke? i realllllly don't think so, as a person who witnessed the event and was actively involed in allll the cleanup.

Originally posted by intelligenTHEORY
Nuke? i realllllly don't think so, as a person who witnessed the event and was actively involed in allll the cleanup.

Most people were fooled that day too, even if you were at ground zero doesn't mean you had the best view or knew what was going on any better. In some ways you were probably more shocked and saw less than the rest of us, and were unable to analyse the situation correctly. No offense.

Originally posted by Essedarius

Originally posted by dariousg
The majority of the world's population, especially those that have actually had access to seeing the events on TV, believe that something suspicious happened and that many of them think that either the government knows something or that they were directly involved.

I think that the population of people who are CURIOUS is quickly rising, but I still think it's far from being the MAJORITY.

Wikipedia, “9/11 Conspiracy Theories”
An October 2006 New York Times and CBS news poll showed that 28 percent believe members of the Bush Administration are mostly lying about "what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States.

Time Magazine, September 2006
A Scripps-Howard poll of 1,010 adults last month found that 36% of Americans consider it "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried out or carried out the attacks themselves.

Admittedly, both these polls are a little old...and polls can be very misleading if you don't know the group that was polled and the exact questions that were asked.

That said, I still think that there is a very large group of people who won't even take the time to respond to a 9/11 conspiracy poll because it is so absurd to them.

(Okay, so I know I just posited something that is completely unproveable and unargueable...guilty...but I do believe it to be true...)

I agree that it is growing but then again, I thought you had stated that the world's population thought otherwise. Both of these polls are US based. We will quickly find that media coverage in other countries can vary quite a bit from our manipulated media. Even with the 'ban' on 9-11 conspiracy coverage the American public is becoming more and more curious about this fateful day.

Also, as you stated, it's tough to really judge from polls like this because we don't know who was polled and such. The same can be said for the polls that show a majority in favor of questioning the events and believing that the Bush admin had something to do with it. When a site that focuses on conspiracy and such holds a poll you will most likely get the numbers in favor of the conspiracy.

If we were to hold a poll in Texas for example I'm sure that the numbers would be much lower. Meaning that they would be heavily in favor of the official story.

Originally posted by VicRH

Originally posted by intelligenTHEORY
Nuke? i realllllly don't think so, as a person who witnessed the event and was actively involed in allll the cleanup.

Most people were fooled that day too, even if you were at ground zero doesn't mean you had the best view or knew what was going on any better. In some ways you were probably more shocked and saw less than the rest of us, and were unable to analyse the situation correctly. No offense.

Agreed. Just because someone was there doesn't make them an expert on this at all. One of the first things you learn in intel is that sometimes if you are too close to the project or event that you will miss many of the obvious clues. You have to back up a bit and look at it from a whole new perspective.

As for a nuke, well, that one is going to be tough to pull off. I know that there are smaller nukes that would be perfect for such an event. It would be extremely tough to cover up the fallout. However, the percentage of cleanup crews that are becoming terminally ill is pretty staggering when you look at it. Only 5 1/2 years removed and a lot of these people are dying. They are also being ignored.

Originally posted by dariousg
However, the percentage of cleanup crews that are becoming terminally ill is pretty staggering when you look at it. Only 5 1/2 years removed and a lot of these people are dying. They are also being ignored.

I think the illnesses are arising are an unfortunate byproduct of working in an environment where about 100 tons of crushed glass, lead, and asbestos just got dumped.

I don't think these illnesses need a cause beyond that to be explained.

And, for the record...as long as there are personal injury lawyers slinking around disaster sites, recovery workers will never be ignored.

Dear ‘Meteorite’ Researchers:

Of course the ‘meteor’ is the result of nuclear fusion explosions at the WTC. The very fact that there was ‘paper’ found in it proves this.



Neutrons coming from the fusion reaction (between deuterium and tritium) will heat up dense, heavy objects first and tend to bypass the lighter ones, such as fluffy paper. There is nothing there for them to ‘smash’ into! This is somewhat analogous to what happens in a microwave oven. Yes, I know, there are no neutrons there. It’s an electromagnetic process. But microwaves will tend to heat up items containing water — and especially grease — and only to a much lesser degree an object like paper. Check it out for yourselves!

And, I’m sure if someone wanted to — but no one does — that meteor could be examined for residual radioactivity. It would show all kinds of funky measurements. Metals turn radioactive after neutrons collide with them. I wouldn’t count on any famed institution looking into this soon though. By the way, does MIT, yes the one in Massachusetts, still subscribe to the pancake collapse theory ? — which they helped pioneer.

Waiting For The Truth Until The Devil Changes His Name,
The Wizard In The Woods

Originally posted by Wizard_In_The_Woods
And, I’m sure if someone wanted to — but no one does — that meteor could be examined for residual radioactivity.

My guess is that one or two of the white coats huddled around that thing would have a pretty keen interest in knowing if it was radioactive.

I continue to be fascinated by this topic...simply because one of these groups HAS to be 100% horrifically WRONG:

1) All the people huddled around it, poking at it at and suggesting that it should be saved as a monument.

2) Everyone here saying that the ONLY POSSIBLE origin of the thing is at the heart of a nuclear explosion...the smoking gun of the 9/11 government operation.

Originally posted by Essedarius
2) Everyone here saying that the ONLY POSSIBLE origin of the thing is at the heart of a nuclear explosion...the smoking gun of the 9/11 government operation.

Not everyone is saying "nuke"... many are saying "unaccounted for tremendous amounts of heat not available in the official story so where did it come from".

Originally posted by Pootie
Not everyone is saying "nuke"...

Fair.

I guess I still have this stuck in my craw from page one:

Originally posted by shrunkensimon
The only thing that can account for the metorite is a hydrogen bomb, no questions.

But I'm still fascinated...dammit...

Originally posted by Essedarius

Originally posted by dariousg
However, the percentage of cleanup crews that are becoming terminally ill is pretty staggering when you look at it. Only 5 1/2 years removed and a lot of these people are dying. They are also being ignored.

I think the illnesses are arising are an unfortunate byproduct of working in an environment where about 100 tons of crushed glass, lead, and asbestos just got dumped.

I don't think these illnesses need a cause beyond that to be explained.

And, for the record...as long as there are personal injury lawyers slinking around disaster sites, recovery workers will never be ignored.

I agree there. The EPA was foolish to state that the area was safe and that the typical paper mask would suffice. Then again, maybe they were told to say that to cover up the cleanup.??? Okay, sorry about that. Couldn't help myself.

As for the lawyers, well, yes and no. What happens when someone like say, a police officer, is let go from duty because of health issues arising from the cleanup yet they make other claims of the cause of the illness? What if they say it is self inflicted. Sure, the lawyers can go after them but now it's a matter of their witnesses versus the states witnesses and their unlimited financial resources.

Makes for a tough case.

However, as for a nuclear/hydrogen bomb, I will still have to see something giving proof to even consider that.

The US has conventional "bombs" that yield a huge ammount of energy, that a huge propane tanks..... voila...huge melting metal...

They needed to sever the core and most probably they sequenced the core with a reactive material so once th ecollapse began subsecuant floors would detonate by inertia and other small explosives, and then you have a nice CD.... and a huge ball or twisted metal and mekted metal in the bottom...

this flow of melted steel coming down the street from the towers couldve created a lot of the damage. And knowing jet fuel wont create what the picture shows, what did?



i124.photobucket.com...

dunno, i do not think the nuke theory is gonna go anywhere... i mean if it was a nuke wouldnt the paper be vaporized immediately and not carbonized? i think whatever damage a nuke would cause to the buildings themselves would be instant, and would very well would have cause a failure of the bathtub.

whatever it was... it makes sense to me that it was an instantaneous and incredible amount of heat/energy which may have melted the steel in the building at the time of implosion... the same source that melted the car engine blocks all around the site.

i would like to see a higher resolution version of this movie clip and see it archived if anyone has the means.

[edit on 11-4-2007 by Starbuck]

Nuke? I dont think there was a nuke, thermate probably. Used on the outside steel support of the building. If you place those thermate cutters in a spiral demo style you take away any visible explosions but still taking out the buildings support. You would then only need few big explosives for the inner steel columns in the basement and the couple floors people used to switch elevators. anyone remember those two smoke stacks or whatever they were that CD took out close to 9/11 for no obvious reason? watch how they fall, that gives an idea. i have a cleaned up photo i did on my photoshop, ill post it.

Originally posted by MINDoverFAITH

i124.photobucket.com...

what is the origin of this photo?