The simple reality of 9/11, what we know and what we don't

Grats OP, it takes a great mind to change a belief, especially one that you were so committed so that you fought for and risked your life for.

What we know:
All three buildings that collapsed in NYC on 9/11 maintained large accelerations throughout their collapse.

For those who can see and understand the implications of this, it is all the evidence that is required to know the OS is a lie.

I failed to add in my earlier response another thing we knew about 9/11. OPERATION ABLE DANGER was an army intelligence operation with the sole mission of gathering intel on Al Qaeda. For over a year this operation complied over 2 TERABYTES of information when the summer before 9/11 the operation was shut down and the INFORMATION ORDERED DESTROYED.

What we know is that somebody knew a lot about Al Qaeda before 9/11 and didn't want others to know it too.

Quoting Come Clean here -

I've always wondered something. If those buildings didn't fall how were they going to put them out? You have two of the world' tallest buildings on fire near the top. There was no way to put those fires out using conventional means.

I believe high rise fires can be put out using adjacent high rise buildings' pumping systems.

Most modern high rises have additional "pumping stations" halfway up, they may have more than one. They need these to get the water up to the higher floors.

I believe fire fighters can hook into/ utilize these adjacent buildings' systems to fight nearby high rise fires.

There are systems in place to fight these fires in urban areas. I've seen high rise fires worked from the next building or across the street, etc.

- just some stray thoughts.

reply to post by weedwhacker


haha changed your avatar I see weed.

Also love how you used wikipedia as a source. So how long did it take you to type all that?

Originally posted by Come Clean
"The insurance policies obtained in July 2001 for World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, 4 and 5 had a collective face amount of $3.55 billion. Following the September 11, 2001 attack, Silverstein sought to collect double the face amount (~$7.1 billion) on the basis that the two separate airplane strikes into two separate buildings constituted two occurrences within the meaning of the policies."

Larry Silverstein

If I took out an insurance policy on my house and it burned down two months later I would be up under the jail.

[edit on 31-7-2010 by Come Clean]

Don't you hate it when the rich get all the free pass? I swear I sometimes wonder if this world is hell.

Yes, you are right that would be considered fraud on a regular joe like you and me.

I find the OP extremely disturbing on multiple levels.

I have looked at the issue every which way from Sunday and I can truly say that I have objectively weighed the evidence that we have in regards to 9/11. I have looked at the truther issue with an extremely skeptical eye in an effort to prove to myself that the OS at least has a chance to be correct, yet I can honestly say that I do not believe in the official conspiracy theory.

...yet I just couldn't close my eyes to logic and reason.

# Advanced engineered pyrotechnic material (nano-thermitic) has been found in several dust samples of the WTC buildings. A peer reviewed scientific paper has been published about this discovery and it's analysis. Anyone in Academia knows the rigorous standards sets for peer review publishing of scientific papers. Why it was there and who put it there are up for debate, though it's difficult to debate that it was there.

You see, none of us really know what happened on that day and seeing how we are paying such a hefty price based on what we are told happened, it would make perfect sense to investigate the events of that fateful day. What's so wrong with a new and real investigation, if for nothing else than to shut the truthers up? I have always said that it doesn't matter whether a truther's theory is accurate, as it only matters whether or not the official conspiracy theory is accurate. If it isn't, then we obviously have something wrong and we need to investigate in order to get to the bottom of it, serve justice and make adjustments accordingly, whatever those adjustments may be.

Another common misconception is that only truthers are conspiracy theorists as it pertains to this issue, while believers in the OS aren't. Hopefully you have noticed throughout this thread, where I have been using the term "official conspiracy theory" to refer to the OS. I use that term because it is exactly what it is, a conspiracy theory. No matter what you believe happened on that day, you most likely believe in a conspiracy theory.

I searched the post for the words 'physics', 'mass', 'gravity' and 'kinetic energy' before I read it.

We are talking about two airliners that had to weigh less than 200 tons supposedly destroying buildings weighing more than 400,000 tons in less than TWO HOURS. And the destruction was TOTAL. Thousands of tons of concrete turned to DUST.

It was all I could think about for two weeks after 9/11. I finally concluded airliners could not do it.

So I admit I cannot comprehend going to war because of that but for thousands of men and women to go off to fight for that, many of them to not return, is in some ways even more horrendous than what happened on 9/11.

So what is going on with the ASSHOLES at our engineering schools that won't even point out the importance of knowing the distributions of steel and concrete to analyzing the event?

The US is the nation that put MEN ON THE MOON for Christ's sake. That involved Newtonian physics. An airliner hitting a skyscraper is Newtonian physics. What kind of computers existed in the country in 1966 when they started digging the hole for the foundation of the WTC? They are a joke compared to what we have today.

But this crap just goes on and on with stupid debates over trivia. I don't care who did it or why anymore. This is a stinking pile of sh!t at the feet of all of our engineering schools.

What would have happened in 2002 if the deans of our top 50 engineerging schools had come out and said that simple Newtonian physics dictated that airliners could no do that much damage in that little time? But now they have to maintain this BS to avoid admitting they were accomplices to a lie. I don't know what did happen but I am pretty sure what could not happen.

9/11 is the Piltdown Man incident of the 21st century. But far bigger.

psik

[edit on 1-8-2010 by psikeyhackr]

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

...Dick Cheney was sitting in the PEOC being advised of another hijacked plane flying toward Washington and being continually updated as the plane closed in, but refused to do or allow anything to be done to stop the aircraft from flying within 1 mile of the White House at a very low altitude and slamming into the Pentagon.

More opinions, no sources to back your claims.

There are dozens, if not hundreds of sources on the net backing this claim, some are conspiracy sites, others are not.

Here is a good source, examining both Cheney's account of the 9/11 timeline and the 9/11 Commisons account, and trying to reconcile the differences between the two, and includes Norman Mineta's statement below:

“During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, ‘The plane is 50 miles out.’ ‘The plane is 30 miles out.’ And when it got down to ‘the plane is 10 miles out,’ the young man also said to the Vice President, ‘Do the orders still stand?’ And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, ‘Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"

Link to Article: globalresearch.ca...

reply to post by Come Clean


Quick....what was in the rooms of that section of that tower??? Quick...come on, you can do it.......


Here's a hint....computer rooms for Sun Bank, full of large UPS'...full of metals that melt at much lower temperatures than steel. You also seem to be stuck on the idea that if you see molten metal, then it MUST be steel.......not understanding that there were thousands of pounds of OTHER metals there.


In other words, again, you have bitten into a 9/11 "truth" falsehood when you post that video.

Originally posted by pteridine
As to the buildings design and construction, the engineers plan and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

That Sir, is the most absurd statement I have ever heard.

[edit on 1-8-2010 by mark-in-dallas]

reply to post by psikeyhackr


One does have to take into consideration from physics, the definition of force, which according to Newton, F = ma. Or more appropriately, kinetic energy, Just as a 45 caliber bullet only weighs a few grams but once fired and you factor in it's velocity, it can easily knock a man off of his feet due to the Kinetic energy force it now contains.

So in actuality, in assessing the force of impact upon the WTC would have to sustain, a more accurate measure would be that of Kinetic energy which is defined by K.
Where K = .5mV**2, which is mass * is multiplied by the square of the plane's velocity.
This force would be distributed amongst the entire structure IMA.

But anyway. We can debate this inside job vs OS story theory until we're Blue in the face.

The fact of the matter is that we now have the Patriot Act, The Department of Homeland Security and two middle east wars directly as a result of 9/11 and Cheney's company Halliburton has profited immensely from all of them.

Does anyone recall that the US Military's Quartermaster has essentially been replaced by Halliburton in supplying the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan ?

That in itself is a conspiracy. For Why are we now paying Dick Cheney's company to supply the military now ?

Now we have recently been told by the media that the 8 Billion Iraqi rebuilding fund, also deposited in the FED as with the Iraqi oil revenues has now gone missing ?

It is very apparent to me that Someone is getting extremely rich from all of this post 9/11 hoopla.

And it is very apparent that it didn't exactly happen by coincidence !

reply to post by impressme


I see by your reply that you are again avoiding the issue and are unable to explain why the super thermite extinguished itself. This is the fatal flaw in Jones' theory and makes him and his supporters look rather foolish. The last time I "got technical" it was way over your head, so I'll just ask a simple question that you should be able to answer:

Why do you think a "highly engineered" nanothermite self extinguished?

Do you or your pals have any explanation? It would seem that such a deadly thermite would burn completely when ignited. Remember that Jones estimmated at least 10 tons of it in the dust. Apparently a great deal of it didn't ignite. Maybe it was a lowly engineered non-thermite like paint.

If you want another technical discussion of Jones' paper, gather your friends and let me know when you are ready.

Originally posted by mark-in-dallas

Originally posted by pteridine
As to the buildings design and construction, the engineers plan and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

That Sir, is the most absurd statement I have ever heard.

Engineering designs don't always work as planned. Engineers sometimes make mistakes or get caught up with unforseen circumstances. Here is an example of something that almost worked but had a little, unforseen design flaw. en.wikipedia.org...(1940)

Would you like to explain your comment, above?

reply to post by pteridine

Your silly ramblings about the WTC thermite "self-extinguishing" are growing tiresome. As a previous poster noted, 1500 degree fires raged underground for months and the FDNY said it took a lakes worth of water to finally dowse the fires. I don't call that "self-extinguishing."

It's interesting that you spend almost all your time trying to debunk a mountain of 9/11 anomalies. I guess that's what professionals do.

reply to post by Come Clean


Thermite doesn't take weeks to burn. The idea that this is evidence of thermite is based on wishful thinking by the poets and conspiracy theorists. If thermite ignites, it reacts quickly and cools like any other piece of hot metal. The heat source was underground fires. Air was available from the subway tunnels under the debris and there was a great deal of fuel from 80-90 stories of offices. These fires can get exceptionally hot and are difficult to extinguish, especially with so many pathways for air and protective, insulating cover.

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Maybe you should read Jones paper before you comment. The picture section is about your speed. Look at Figure 20. It shows pictures of partially burned "highly engineered material" that didn't stay lit. Oops. Jonesy's theory just hit a snag.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Come Clean

 

The heat source was underground fires. Air was available from the subway tunnels under the debris and there was a great deal of fuel from 80-90 stories of offices. These fires can get exceptionally hot and are difficult to extinguish, especially with so many pathways for air and protective, insulating cover.

OMG, your "explanations" keep getting better and better. Small oxygen-starved black smoke fires 80 stories up that somehow became 1500 degree underground fires that raged for months and took a "lakes worth of water to extinguish"?

You're too much...

Originally posted by nh_ee
One does have to take into consideration from physics, the definition of force, which according to Newton, F = ma. Or more appropriately, kinetic energy, Just as a 45 caliber bullet only weighs a few grams but once fired and you factor in it's velocity, it can easily knock a man off of his feet due to the Kinetic energy force it now contains.

Can it knock down a tree stump rooted in the ground that weighs just as much as the man?

Skyscrapers don't have knees and and muscles holding joints in position.

A man will fall down if he just relaxes his muscles. I am really sick of people making comparisons to bullets hitting animate objects. That is really DUMB.

But anyway. We can debate this inside job vs OS story theory until we're Blue in the face.

I am not debating Inside Jobs vs the Official Conspiracy Theory. Debating Newtonian physics 41 years after the Moon landing is totally absurd. I am talking about physics. If we don't know the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on every level then how can we do the physics? But why aren't all of the people who claim to know physics demanding that information?

Try finding the weight os a complete floor assembly.

psik

[edit on 1-8-2010 by psikeyhackr]

reply to post by GoldenFleece

Small oxygen-starved black smoke fires

With smoke trails trails that were visible from the space station with the naked eye.

Yep, small fires indeed.

reply to post by psikeyhackr

If we don't know the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on every level then how can we do the physics? But why aren't all of the people who claim to know physics demanding that information?

Could it be that those people actually know physics?

That's the nice thing with real physics and advanced math- you don't need to know useless details in order to make accurate predictions.

Someday when you study the stuff in school you'll understand.