911, Non-Believers of OS Can We Agree?

I'm not that well read on 9/11 at all, but from all the things I've read I definitely don't believe the OS, I know that crap is fake both from observation and raw instincts.

So I can agree that the OS is bunk, my question is, exactly how plausible is the nano-thermite theory, what's the argument of the skeptics, is there something for them to stand on?

Another general question to ATS, why can't you make threads with built in polls? I think the board would improve slightly from it, you wouldn't have to count posts when making a thread asking peoples opinion on something.

Originally posted by impressme

Agree,

but there is creatable science that supports this claim.

You sure got that right...the "science" is "created" that supports this BS.

Originally posted by impressme
Your childish belittling is pathetic; attacking my grammar does not make you creditable.

Something, I think, about if you cannot articulate your thoughts/beliefs in an intelligent, educated or learned manner, why should anyone take what you believe or claim seriously?

Between "createable" and "creditable" your posts are just comic relief.

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by impressme
Your childish belittling is pathetic; attacking my grammar does not make you creditable.

Something, I think, about if you cannot articulate your thoughts/beliefs in an intelligent, educated or learned manner, why should anyone take what you believe or claim seriously?

Between "createable" and "creditable" your posts are just comic relief.

This is it?
This is what the OS side has as a last defence?

Spell Check

Don't give up so easily guys.

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
The towers were all heavily occupied by tens of thousands of people,

Actually a lot of floors were empty.

The occupancy of the WTC towers short before 9-11 2001

WTC: The occupancy in the North tower
-- 50% of the empty floors are over the 70th floor
-- 25% of the empty floors are over the 90th floor (p.212)

The location where the initial structural collapse began for both towers was at the point of impact of the planes. For the north tower, this was floors 93-99. For the south tower, this was floors 77-85. All of these floors were fully occupied. Whatever point it was you were attempting to support with this innuendo, it is without merit.

List of tenants in the North tower
List of Tenants in the South tower

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Whatever point it was you were attempting to support with this innuendo, it is without merit.

I have shown that there were empty floors. Please be mature enough to accept and admit to facts shown.

Originally posted by Sean48
This is it?
This is what the OS side has as a last defence?

Spell Check

Don't give up so easily guys.

It is not a last defense to point out Impressme's Freudean slip. The bulk of the "proof" supporting these conspiracy stories IS creatable. All you need to do is look at the stupid "Bush knew someone, who knew someone, who knew someone, who knew someone, who knew HITLER" innuendo games these damned fool conspiracy web sites are playing to see that for yourself.

Originally posted by REMISNE
I have shown that there were empty floors. Please be mature enough to accept and admit to facts shown.

I must tell you that bait and switch games do not work on me. I have shown that the floors where the initial structural collapses began were fully occupied and were chock full of surviving witnesses. These are established facts and they cannot be debated. If your conspiracy stories cannot get past that, then whatever other claims you may make concerning other floors are entirely moot.

As far as the thermite theory, wouldn't it be plausible to say that since there was heavy remodeling and construction going on in the months before the attacks, that the thermite could have been mixed in with painting materials? I am no scientist, and while I know of thermite (I made a kill switch for one of my old computers out of sheer curiosity, and it does burn hotter than the blazes of Hell), I'm not really sure of its properties, how hot it burns, etc.

If there was enough thermite mixed in with the paint, couldn't you say that if the jet fuel from the planes were to ignite the thermite, that it would burn hot enough to constitute structural failure, and cause the buildings to collapse?

Of course, that still doesn't explain why the buildings looked like they were falling down as if it were a professional demolition job. I watched it on TV the day it happened, and it just didn't seem right.

Anyway, nice thread, albeit over done, and some good food for thought.

Originally posted by truthseeker1984
As far as the thermite theory, wouldn't it be plausible to say that since there was heavy remodeling and construction going on in the months before the attacks, that the thermite could have been mixed in with painting materials?

I can see what kind of reception building management would have gotten from the tenants if they decided to paint everyone's walls dark gray.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
I must tell you that bait and switch games do not work on me. I have shown that the floors where the initial structural collapses began were fully occupied and were chock full of surviving witnesses.

Thanks for showing you cannot accept and admit to facts shown.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by truthseeker1984
As far as the thermite theory, wouldn't it be plausible to say that since there was heavy remodeling and construction going on in the months before the attacks, that the thermite could have been mixed in with painting materials?

I can see what kind of reception building management would have gotten from the tenants if they decided to paint everyone's walls dark gray.

It was really just a question, nothing more. The thermite I used in my kill switch was red, and I got it from a local school chemistry lab supplier.

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
I must tell you that bait and switch games do not work on me. I have shown that the floors where the initial structural collapses began were fully occupied and were chock full of surviving witnesses.

Thanks for showing you cannot accept and admit to facts shown.

I didn't say I don't accept your facts. I'm saying your facts are irrelevent becuase they do not contradict my facts.

The initial point of collapse for both buildings were at the points of impact, meaning that wherever these mythical controlled demolitions of yours may or may not have been planted, they definitely had to have been planted there. It doesn't make a microbe of difference if anyplace else in the buildings were empty. The whole building outside of those areas could have been empty. In order for your conspiracy stories to survive, those areas needed to have been empty...and they were NOT empty.

Go ahead and continue beating this dead horse if you'd like, but in the end, your conspiracy claims are still completely untenable.

"they start making up stuff on their own that's impossible to prove or deny I.E. super secret gov't explosives noone has ever seen before. This isn't proving anything. You're simply restating the original conspiracy in different terms. That's the definition of "circular logic", in case you didn't know."

I guess I missed the last parade where all the top secret advanced weaponry was on display for everyone (including enemies) to see. When is the next Open House at Los Alamos or White Sands?

"The towers were all heavily occupied by tens of thousands of people, so they did NOT have the time, and they did NOT have the access, and despite how deep you conspiracy theorists claim to have looked into things, you can't even agree amongst yourselves who the THEY even are"

"Actually a lot of floors were empty.

The occupancy of the WTC towers short before 9-11 2001
WTC: The occupancy in the North tower
-- 50% of the empty floors are over the 70th floor
-- 25% of the empty floors are over the 90th floor (p.212)"

That Larry Pull It dude got a nice big fat insurance check for a couple of buildings which weren't anywhere near capacity. And don't forget about the third check for Building 7, the collapse of which was proven by the use of creative OS mathematics (two alleged airplanes = three real building collapses).

"who knew someone, who knew HITLER" innuendo games"

What exactly is the purpose for interjecting Hitler into a 9/11 thread about structural collapse? First Spell Check, now veiled Antisemitism. The previous poster was correct, the OS apologists are really scraping the bottom of the barrel now.

"I really am not trying to throw gas on a dying fire, but hopefully everyone can see the humor in that."

Save your gas - you'll need it to restart the OS Apologists when they conk out shortly.


How the buildings collapsed is secondary to proving the following:

1. Who had the available resources to undertake such a sophisiticated attack?

2. Who benefited (and continues to benefit) from the attacks?

3. Why was the American Government anxious to respond to such an attack by primarily destroying all human rights?

4. Why did the insurance carriers offer no defense, nor any resistance in making payments, even agreeing to grossly overpay the claims?

5. How can all the major media outlets be in agreement about such a dubious and illogical story?






[edit on 3-2-2010 by SphinxMontreal]

I am no expert in all this and i have been staying on the outside of this whole argument for some time ! Can anyone correct me if i'm wrong (politely if poss) but i either read or heard somewhere at one time that the beams girders etc were all at convenient lengths when the trade centre came down, as to fit quite nicely on to low loaders to be transported away ! No cutting or whatever was needed to get them to the desired lengths ! Is that the case ?

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
I guess I missed the last parade where all the top secret advanced weaponry was on display for everyone (including enemies) to see. When is the next Open House at Los Alamos or White Sands?

Thank you for bringing this up, Sphinx, as it does illustrate a legitimate point. I have chatted with Impressme before, and he is notorious for demanding documention for chain of custody for any and all evidence supporting the commission report. He has, for example, demanded that I post the exact name of the news photographer who took pictures of the wreckage on the White House lawn.

We now see him making the incredible blanket statement of, "Can we all agree the WTC were demolish with some kind of sophisticated technology probably unknown to demolition Co". Either the conspiracy theorists have a pathologically phony double standard where every nut, bolt, and door hinge of the 9/11 commission report needs to be documented in minute detail and yet they themselves can blurt out any half baked conspiracy claim without needing even a crayon drawing to support it ...OR...conspiracy theorists have evidence that shows the WTC was destroyed by explosives for which evidence doesn't exist.

The reason I mention this is becuase Impressme is not the only person doign this. One person here demanded to know the exact component of WTC 7 that caught fire when wreckage from WTC 1 fell on it, and yet another demanded to know exactly how much aviation fuel was poured down the elevator shafts. I've even seen one guy demanding to know how much fuel passenger jets use in an hour. Why are you demanding to know such intricate information and yet such vague blanket conspiracy statements are perfectly acceptable?

He is refusing to answer, so since you're interested in this, I will ask you your opinions on this contradiction.

What exactly is the purpose for interjecting Hitler into a 9/11 thread about structural collapse? First Spell Check, now veiled Antisemitism. The previous poster was correct, the OS apologists are really scraping the bottom of the barrel now.

In case you haven't noticed...and it seems to be a pattern that conspiracy theorists never notice their double standards...it is these conspiracy web sites bring up Hitler with these ridiculous Prescott Bush accusations, such as...

Bush family connection to Hitler blah blah blah

...which a) is nothing but a five degrees of separation, "Kevin Bacon" game, and b) nothing but innuendo to smear Pres. Bush and call him a traitor, without actually coming out and saying it. The question therefore is, what is the purpose of the conspiracy theorists for bringing Hitler into the picture"?

Doesn't it bother you in the least that these ridiculous stunts of yours to embellish your information at every opportunity make you look like you have all the credibility of used car salesmen?

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

In case you haven't noticed...and it seems to be a pattern that conspiracy theorists never notice their double standards...it is these conspiracy web sites bring up Hitler with these ridiculous Prescott Bush accusations, such as...

Bush family connection to Hitler blah blah blah

...which a) is nothing but a five degrees of separation, "Kevin Bacon" game, and b) nothing but innuendo to smear Pres. Bush and call him a traitor, without actually coming out and saying it. The question therefore is, what is the purpose of the conspiracy theorists for bringing Hitler into the picture"?

Dave

you really have to stop going to

THOSE DAMN FOOL CONSPIRACY SITES FOR YOUR INFORMATION

Originally posted by ProRipp
I am no expert in all this and i have been staying on the outside of this whole argument for some time ! Can anyone correct me if i'm wrong (politely if poss) but i either read or heard somewhere at one time that the beams girders etc were all at convenient lengths when the trade centre came down, as to fit quite nicely on to low loaders to be transported away ! No cutting or whatever was needed to get them to the desired lengths ! Is that the case ?

No, this is yet more BS misrepresentation by the damned fool conspiracy sites. The steel being retrieved during the cleanup from ground zero was in completely random lengths. During the cleanup, steel workers with torches cut the steel into lengths that would fit onto trucks. According to "Aftermath", the book by NY photographer Joel Meyerowitz, many of the steel workers cleaning up ground zero were the same steel workers that built the WTC to begin with.

Saying that it's suspicious how the steel "conveniently" fit onto the trucks is like saying it's suspicious how your foot "conveniently" fits into your shoe.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


It's hardly suspicious that the vast majority of column sections came down in pieces exactly the same size they were when delivered before being bolted &/or welded together during construction. Pieces about 30' long that were carried away on trailers similar to the ones they were originally delivered on during construction. The only pieces needing to be cut were those whose joins survived the collapse IE the 'spires' and survivng sections of outer walls but that simple explanation is a bit too 'ordinary' for many

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
I didn't say I don't accept your facts. I'm saying your facts are irrelevent becuase they do not contradict my facts.

I have shown facts and evidence that show resonable doubt in the official story. This evidence would hold up in court.

Also please be mature enough to read my post, i never stated anything about explosives.



[edit on 4-2-2010 by REMISNE]