Fact. Explosives found in 911 dust.

[Theige]

Where's the big hole? All you see is a bulging on the side of the building and then a straight down collapse. Isn't it true only a handful of companies can actually bring down a high-rise building right into its footprint? What are the chances that three buildings would do what only a few companies in the world are able to do - accidentally?? Doesn't make sense.

None of the buildings fell straight down, "right into its footprint."

 

[Conspirator]

This fire did reach those temperatures. ruined the fired insulation in a lot of areas. But the structure would have failed do to the fire even with that intact. This is the whole contents of several floors on fire with the wind freely whipping through to give conditions not normally seen outside of a metals smelter.

NIST say that the office fires reached a maximum temperature of 1000 oC on their website. The fires wouldn't have collapsed without the plane getting rid of the insulation, according to official theory. Other high rise buildings have had office fires over many more stories and for over 10 hours without any structural damage.

Yeah, that guy is clearly wrong. The mass striking each successive floor pulverized the concrete that lower floor was made of. That's the dust that was everywhere. And with the concrete turned to dust, the physical structure of the steel, which was also damaged by the impacts, failed.

It accelerated as it went down because falling things normally do that. There just wasn't enough in their way to stop them.

Well I don't know about that, think about it. This sledge hammer (the upper floors) snapped off from the weakened columns and smashed into the lower level. If it hit the lower level with a bang (like you say, a hammer) which caused the rest of the building to collapse with each successive BANG, BANG, BANG, then it would have jolted upwards or at least stopped accelerating. Something falling does accelerate, but if it hits something it will of course be slowed. If you watch the video of the mast, you'll see it accelerates as it does down. I'll try and find the video it's very convincing.

 

[Conspirator]

Do you know what force is?

Do you? As in the force of an object hitting another object? As opposed to the force of an object falling without resistance? Read the post above. Or did you mean the Force as in implying I have been mind-tricked?

 

[Conspirator]

None of the buildings fell straight down, "right into its footprint."

They are pretty clean though aren't they? Look remarkably similar to controlled demolition, don't they? I don't think anyone can deny that.

 

[Terrapin]

Even if you allow that everything in this paper is a fact, it proves nothing. Two airliners and several large buildings were destroyed. These materials, if they were explosives, could have been anywhere. Finding a few chips of thermite does not show that thermite was used to destroy the WTC. It proves, at most, that there was some thermite present in the area. You see, Conspirator, knocking down huge buildings with explosives requires quite a lot of explosives and those explosives have distinct thermal fingerprints. If the WTC had been blown up with explosives, it would be very, very easy to prove, since approximately every camera in the world was pointed at those buildings.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Conspirator, can you paint me what you think really happened on 9/11? Please keep in mind the practical difficulties which come with rigging a building which is buzzing with activity without anyone seeing the rigging go up. How this rigging survived the impact on 2 occasions (it's clear the building started to collapse at the point of impact, so that where the 'explosives' (is termite an explosive?) had to go off to start the collapse. You seem to imply the floors under the point of impact where also rigged, which would increase the difficulties rigging an office building while it's being used.

There are many more practical speedbumps to go over when you try to reconstruct the towers collapsing because of explosives, but an answer to these for now will be greatly appreciated.

They are pretty clean though aren't they? Look remarkably similar to controlled demolition, don't they? I don't think anyone can deny that.

I can. A controlled demolition is designed not to damage the surrounding buildings. Did you ever see an aerial shot of the damage?




This is far from clean

 

[Conspirator]

I don't claim to know that, all I'm saying is that there is evidence of explosives found from four samples from different locations in Manhattan from WTC dust. Watch interview and tell me you don't think this deserves a bit of open mindedness? This is evidence of one theory being correct and another being false. Like when someone found evidence we weren't at the centre of the universe, sort of thing. Deserves to be treated properly, like an open scientific paper.

Someone earlier mentioned gravity and that gravity is also a theory. Yes, thanks for that. *thumbs up* but the thing is gravity is a theory with evidence to back it up. The official theory has no evidence BUT NOW THE CONSPIRACY THEORY DOES. So basically what this paper does it make it more scientifically credible. And rather than just being off hand with stuff, maybe you guys should act 'intellectual' and 'open minded' like the threads you guys make 'oh, rather, are we intellectuals on here??' and actually be open minded and intellectual about this?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Question remains, can you paint me the picture of what you think really happened on 9/11?

 

[Joecoolyo]

Someone earlier mentioned gravity and that gravity is also a theory. Yes, thanks for that. *thumbs up* but the thing is gravity is a theory with evidence to back it up. The official theory has no evidence BUT NOW THE CONSPIRACY THEORY DOES. So basically what this paper does it make it more scientifically credible.

lolwutpear.jpg

Moderator Action: I understand your frustration, but next time, please just report posts or reply with at least some discussion point.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The official theory has no evidence

Dude, if you're going to say things like this, people will think you're a nutter.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center

FACT: Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.

Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air—along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse—was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."

Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. "I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line." But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: "The paymaster of Romero's research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement." Romero responds: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."

 

[Conspirator]

Question remains, can you paint me the picture of what you think really happened on 9/11?

Don't claim to know and don't want to speculate. All I was doing here was making people aware that a scientist has provided evidence that the official theory is not credible. Who knows what such large quantities of thermite was doing in WTC dust?

Maybe it has nothing to do with the collapse, but there are too many suspicions concerning 911.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Wikipedia says this about thermite:
"Copper thermite is used for welding together thick copper wires for the purpose of electrical connections. It is used extensively by the electrical utilities and telecommunications industries (exothermic welded connections)."

 

[Conspirator]

Ziggy the pan-cake theory is no longer credible NIST has found it not to be true. That popular mechanics thing is no longer credible.

NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system—that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns—consisted of a grid of steel “trusses” integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

 

[IglooDame]

Don't claim to know and don't want to speculate. All I was doing here was making people aware that a scientist has provided evidence that the official theory is not credible. Who knows what such large quantities of thermite was doing in WTC dust?

Maybe it has nothing to do with the collapse, but there are too many suspicions concerning 911.

No, the evidence your scientist provides does not address the official theory at all, it only supports a different theory. You are separately arguing against the official theory by stating that you think only a planned/controlled demolition "could look like that", and folks here are offering rebuttal.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Ziggy the pan-cake theory is no longer credible NIST has found it not to be true. That popular mechanics thing is no longer credible.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

Would you call this evidence to support the official theory?

Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation.

In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.

 

[Conspirator]

I call this evidence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&feature=related

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Don't dodge me. You said there was no evidence to support the official theory.

Would you call what you posted evidence to support the official theory?

 

[Maimonides]

Millions of us watched the 2nd plane hit live. Some of my friends were nearby when the 1st plane hit. There were four planes hijacked that day. The people who funded & planned the attacks claimed responsibility. The towers were massive structures in use for decades. It's not surprising that all kinds of crap was found in the debris.

The OP is insinuating that the towers were blown up with pre-placed explosives despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The OP is not even having the integrity to explain what he thinks "really" happened. We all know what this is, but we can't say it & we don't know why the mods are allowing it. It's on the level of holocaust denial & claiming the moon landings were faked.

I find this conspiracy BS to be incredibly disrespectful of those who lost their lives & those who lost their parents, children, siblings & friends. This is not a game. We're not searching for proof that Col. Mustard did it with a candlestick. It's about real human suffering.

 

[Moss]

Moderator Action: Thread closed. CFC is not the place to disseminate your conspiracy theories.