This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Most Boring Superbowl Ever … Until 9/11 Truth Proponent Interrupts MVP Interview
This clip has gotten a lot of media attention … almost as much as Peyton Manning explaining why the football hit his helmet on the very first play (leading to a safety, and the fastest score in superbowl history).
Winning Seahawks coach Pete Carroll also questions 9/11. As do some old-timers, like 5-time NFL Pro Bowl center Mark Stepnoski (Dallas Cowboys and Houston Oilers) and former NFL running back Bill Enyart (Buffalo Bills and Oakland Raiders).
What do you think? How many of you think:
(1) The government couldn’t have foreseen 9/11, and did everything it could to minimize the damage (while perhaps being negligent in its foresight, coordination, communication, priorities or execution)?
(2) 9/11 was an inside job carried out by rogue elements of the U.S. government as a “false flag attack“?
(3) The government knew the attack was coming, but allowed it to succeed to justify the launching of the war for oil – er, I mean the “War on Terror” – and to consolidate power and crackdown on liberties at home?
»
- advertisements -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk
Take a look again: no twisting of any sort.
"Take a look again: no twisting of any sort."
Yes there was. The east end twisted to the north. The first thing that happened was that the floors under the east penthouse collapsed, causing the east penthouse to collapse. When the global collapse occured, that section of WTC7 twisted.
If you knew anything about structural engineering, dude, you'd be face-palming yourself for that one. Everything you say is 100% correct; if you kicked the entire frame of a building out of true by a degree or two, it could indeed stand for hours before it fell down - in the exact direction in which it had been displaced. You can try it for yourself, if you want. Build a tower out of beer cans, with each can just slightly out of true with the one below, so the structure is slightly slanted, and sit it on a coffee table. Now nudge the table a bit. They'll always fall down in the direction in which you've biased them out of vertical. Always.
"If you knew anything about structural engineering, dude, you'd be face-palming yourself for that one. Everything you say is 100% correct"
Why would he be face palming himself for being 100% correct?
Because it did not topple but fell into its own footprint?
"Because it did not topple but fell into its own footprint?"
Why should it have toppled?
Because supposedly it was somehow "Off Plumb" whatever the fuck that means.
But let's talk about Dick Cheney's role in allowing the "aircraft" to approach the Pentagon. I want to know why "The order still stands".
Count de Money is a total fucking liar. His comments come straight from the playbook of democrat operatives. First, insult the intelligence of your opponent. Offer your own point of view and again, belittle your opponent for not aggreing with your logical and rational argument. No, use a guilt trip on your opponent to make them feel like their point of view is racist or degrading to women or insulting to grieving families. Finally, end your enlightening piece of wisdom with another condescending insult.
Now that your work is done, you can reward yourself by shoving a gerbil up your ass and and rubbing one out to your Tevo'd Obama SOTU address.
Don't go away mad....
Interesting Dr. Count.
Do you have a peer reviewed paper to go with that definition of "plumb/off plumb"?...
I'm not sure NIST came to your same conclusion on WTC 7, so perhaps once you explain it here you can take your technical analysis of what actually happened to Gaithersburg Maryland and help Mr. Sunder and Mr. Gross out with there report that came out in 2008 and was never made a part of the official "911 Commission Report" in 2004?
Number 2, although the definition of "rogue elements" is dubious when the President was perhaps inside Number 3, while the Vice President and some other high level officials were necessarily inside Number 2.
There were many layers of motivations, with different people probably making money from 9/11. However, in my opinion, the primary purpose of 9/11 was as a deliberate investment in mass murder, designed to enable more mass murders in the future.
Exactly how the events were done is open to reasonable debate, and probably always will be, since proper investigations were never allowed to happen. Some of the most important information concerns who had the power to ensure that the forensic evidence concerning mass murder was summarily destroyed, rather than preserved and carefully examined.
THERE ARE TWO LEVELS: THE FIRST LEVEL CONCERNS THOSE WHO DID IT, AND THE SECOND LEVEL CONCERNS THOSE WHO WHO MADE SURE TO COVER THAT UP, WHILE PROMOTING A FALSE STORY.
9/11 events became runaway prosperous treason:
Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.
John Harington
Successful and fortunate crime is called virtue.
Seneca
Governments are the biggest forms of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals. 9/11 was not unique, other than being, so far, the most spectacular symbol of the general pattern of social facts. The financial crises precipitated in 2008 were also an "inside job," as a documentary with that title demonstrated. Money is measurement backed by murder. There are combined money/murder systems, whereby the debt controls are backed by the death controls. That is the overall background context in which events like 9/11 operate as significant figures. The American monetary system is the result of the international banksters corrupting the American government, by systematically and persistently applying the methods of organized crime (bribery and intimidation, and assassination of those who could not be bribed or intimidated), to result in the current system of privatized fiat "money," made out of nothing, as debts. More than a Century of that history, picking up speed at an exponential rate, was what enabled 9/11 to happen, and, in turn, the USA could not have developed in North America without thousands of years of previous history developing Neolithic Civilization social pyramid systems. The USA has become almost totally controlled by integrated systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence, through which means debt slavery is backed up by wars based on deceits. That system overall is entering into a paradoxical phase of final failure from too much success.
Choice number 1, in George Washington's article, is obviously absurd, after one spends enough time to go through the available information about 9/11. Click on that link if you care to skim through my kind of bla, bla, blah on that topic, which is a record of my looking at pretty well everything relevant that I could find on the topic since I watched the Loose Change video back in 2006. THE MORE YOU KNOW, THE WORSE IT GETS!
THE MORE YOU KNOW, THE WORSE IT GETS!
Truly, ignorance is strength.
(I will work harder)
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-04/who-said-it-you-can-measure-ame...
tarsubil
"Obama told me Building 7 fell down because it was tired."
My favourite explanation.
It was "le tired" Good one!
Never "misunderestimate" the power of skinny,hairy,little guys, with box cutters.... You can fool me again, just don't keep fooling me.
how about the warnings people received beforehand? Not to fly to New York? Mayor Willy Brown, Salmon Rushdie.
Heck even JOHN FUCKING ASHCROFT stopt flying commercial 2 month before 9-11.
And guess what bitchezzz...jet fuel doesn't melt steel!
The conspiracy is even larger than you can imagine. Even Amazon is in on it. Yes, Amazon. I can link to it, and you know links equal truth. In fact, that’s why evolution is a lie, ‘cause it’s full of missing links. Anyway, look at this:
http://www.amazon.com/Coleman-550B725-Exponent-Multi-Fuel-Stove/dp/B0009VC7QK/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1391480408&sr=8-8&keywords=kerosene+camping+stove
That bastard Jeff Bezos thinks we are so stupid as to use a kerosene stove to make our coffee or soup when we’re camping. Now both you and I know that the flash point of kerosene is at most 65 degrees Celsius, and water doesn’t boil until 100 degrees. Even the fire point is barely 10 degrees higher, so it’s still well below water’s boiling point. What, Bezos thinks we’re just going to sit there for months trying to get water to boil with a kerosene fire, while he and Coleman snicker? Well, old Jeff can be laughing at somebody else, but not you and me, right! We’re too smart for him. We know physiques and thermos dynamics!
What’s really sad---and totally preventable---is that hundreds of millions of people in places like India still use kerosene stoves to cook. At those low temperatures, no wonder all of them get Delhi Belly. The heart just aches. Oh, the humanity!
And don’t get me started on blacksmiths. If there was ever a dead end job, that was it. How the hell did any of them ever expect to work steel? I mean some of them just used coal or propane, which burn way too low compared to steel’s melting point. Heck, Uri Geller could do it faster than a guy with a coal fire, you know what I mean.
I have no clue about where you are getting our information from. But here is where I am getting my information from.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel
The Flash Point of Jet Fuel is 38oC which is LESS THAN 65oC.
But Flash Points and Open Air Burning Temperatures are two Different Material Properties.
But the Open Air Burning Temperature for Kerosene is in the range of 260oC to 315oC. The Temperature listed is dependent upon both Pressure and available Oxygen as these differ at increasing Ground Altitudes. At Flagstaff, AZ at 6900 feet Elevation one will expect an Open Air Burning Temperature near 260oC while in San Diego CA, or, New York City, one will expect a Open Air Burning Temperature of 315oC.
Under pressure Kerosene burns at extremely High Temperatures necessitating the Exhaust Turbines in a Jet Engine to be Manufactured out of Titanium Alloys which can handle that type of Heat and subsequent stresses due to Angular Momentum and Centripetal Forces exerted upon the Material..
As for Steel, according to my source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_steel
The lowest temperature at which a plain carbon steel can BEGIN to melt, its solidus, is 1,130 °C (2,070 °F). Steel never turns into a liquid below this temperature. Pure Iron ('Steel' with 0% Carbon) starts to melt at 1,492 °C (2,718 °F), and is completely liquid upon reaching 1,539 °C (2,802 °F). Steel with 2.1% Carbon by weight begins melting at 1,130 °C (2,070 °F), and is completely molten upon reaching 1,315 °C (2,399 °F).
Notice that the Minimum Temperature at which Steel can melt, at 1,130oC, is 3.587 TIMES Greater than that of the Maximum Open Air Burning Temperature of Jet Fuel of 315oC.
Now one can raise Temperatures or lower Temperatures inside of furnaces and foundries by increasing available Oxygen or restricting available Oxygen. This was, in ancient times, perform by using a Bellows. Today's high tech Furnaces are gas fed.
Now if you are INTENTIONALLY ATTEMPTING TO OBFUSCATE THE FACTS WITH DISHONEST MISINFORMATION then you have compromised your credibility.
The major difference is that I can back my statements up with facts and sources. Furthermore I have the fucking EXPERIENCE.
You might want to do some RESEARCH before making a snark post which demonstrates your IGNORANCE or DISHONESTY.
Tall Tom,
Perhaps you can explain the physics behind a simple classroom demonstration to me (since I hate math and all... and university is such a haze in my memory at this point).
Experiment:
Straighten out a paper clip (mild steel) and secure horizontally it in a vise
Affix incrementally increasing weights (static load) from a balance to the end of the paper clip and determine the mass required to induce failure (bending) at room temperature within 10 minutes
Repeat with new paper clip and 1/3 the weight (margin of safety in engineering nerd speak), verify that the paper clip remains straight indefinitely (or until you get really bored)
Repeat with new paper clip and the 1/3 the weight and this time -- light a zippo underneath the paper clip (it burns light petroleum distillate)
Record the time required and temperature at which the paper clip fails with the 1/3 the weight and the flame
Compare the the observed steel temperature at the point of failure to 1) the melting point of mild steel and 2) to the burning temperature for light petroleum distillate in your laboratory environment
Smoke a good joint or cigar and ponder the implications...
Repeat as necessary.
---
When I hear people from the structural engineering community use the word "melting point" in the context of the engineering discrepancies with the Ministry of Truth's version of the 9/11 story and without a whole bunch of qualifications and mathematical formulas, I start to wonder just whose useful idiot they are, or what agenda they are trying to push and why. Don't be seduced into chasing the red herring, there are so many other indefensible errors in their logic of lies.
But perhaps there is something I missed in a physics lecture while cramming for those gawd-afwul engineering exams...
"Don't be seduced into chasing the red herring, there are so many other indefensible errors in their logic of lies."
It is kind of funny. I understand that you are right. But the Physics of it fascinates me so. So when they make erroneous statements that APPEAL TO MY INTERESTS...I fall back upon that which I know....where I am comfortable.
It is an interesting tactic.
So what I did was write the following before what you wrote struck me...
What am I doing? I am falling back on the Physics.
It is funny because I have been writing throughout this thread that it does not matter HOW, but, it matters WHOM.
Then I concentrate on HOW??? Now that is craziness on my part. Perhaps I need to read my own words...
Thank you for throwing that in my face. I needed that.
And then I wasted the better part of a Half Hour writing the following... Here is HOW???
Which...You can disregard.
I like your experiment. But Paper Clips are Pot Metal. (Could not resist your allusion to smoking a good joint.) Again while Heat induces maleability (when working Steel you do work it hot...as any Blacksmith knows) the temperatures needed to do this are elevated near the melting point.
Considering that the Structural Steel Frame of the WTC Towers was fabricated out of A36 we must consider the Physical Properties of A36.
According to the source and ANSI Standards and I quote,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A36_steel
A36 steel in plates, bars, and shapes with a thickness of less than 8 in (203 mm) has a minimum yield strength of 36,000 psi (250 MPa) and ultimate tensile strength of 58,000–80,000 psi (400–550 MPa). Plates thicker than 8 in have a 32,000 psi (220 MPa) yield strength and the same ultimate tensile strength.[1] The Electrical Resistance of A36 is 0.0000153 ohm/cm. A36 bars and shapes maintain their ultimate strength up to 650°F. Afterward, the minimum strength drops off from 58,000 psi: 54,000 psi at 700°F; 45,000 psi at 750°F; 37,000 psi at 800°F.
WE do see an Drop off of Strengths at elevated Temperatures.
Note that 650oF = 343.33oC
Again..Jet Fuel has a Open Air Burning Temperature of 260 oC to 315 oC.
If Jet Fuel was the hottest burning accelerant in the Towers after the strike then...
You must notice that the Temperature of 315oC < 343.33 oC
The temperature, at Sea Level Open Air Burning of Jet Fuel, did not exceed that of the Temperature of the Ultimate Strength of A36.
(Ultimate needs to have been rendered as Maximium.)
Thus the Kerosene Fire had no contributory Factor to Structural Failure.
So one must infer that something was burning quite a bit hotter than Jet Fuel.
So let's consider Fire...
What color was the Flames in the Building? Again, as I am left without Physical Evidence, I must rely upon the film.
Here is a chart of Flame Temperatures by Color as reference by my source...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire#Typical_temperatures_of_fires_and_flames
The color of the flames in the World Trade Center gives me an indication that Burning Temperatures were near that of 700oC to 800oC.
What Color do they appear as to you as I must be colorblind?
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtcfires5.html
If the Fires were burning HOT at 800oC then the structure would have been appreciably weakened by Fire and that would be contributory to collapse.
Of course I could neglect another important factor...ASBESTOS.
The Buildings were designed to handle Aircraft Strikes.
As you are an Engineer (You studied the same as I did as ALL of the Universities teach the same Physics.) I am certain that you know how much checking is undertaken when Engineering a Skyscraper, or, any structure. People's Licenses are on the line. Every Blueprint Drawing is checked, then checked again. The Modeling process is somewhat tedious. But it serves a purpose that made America great. There was a pride taken in Craftsmanship in the 1960s and 1970s as we were the preminent power.
Any Engineering Project of where I have served a role was taken with great care and attention to detail, by myself, and other coworkers.
We were at the pinnacle back in the 1960s and early 1970s.
I'm not an engineer I just get to boss them around, make them justify their conclusions, and wish they had a lazy .gov job (probably at NIST). I did a minor in Structural so that I would have something practical to go along with the overpriced piece of two-ply that passes for International Bullshit & Finance. But I have to pay a currently licensed discipline specific engineer within the authority having jurisdiction to put his stamp on my drawings and calculations every time I build for myself just like everyone else.
I spent the better part of an hour after I got back last night looking for a post I made about a year ago, but I think the OP's account and posts got hosed an took my response with it, which sucks because it had a link to a much better MacGraw Hill reference with an expanded discussion heat stress in A36 structural steel and others. But your analysis based on flame color hits the nail on the head. The generic steel graphs on page 20 FIGURE- 1.8 Effect of temperature on (a) yield strength and tensile strength and (b) modulus of elasticity of structural steels. (Adapted from data in AISC “Specification for Structural Steel Buildings,” 2005.) and on page 21 specific A36 data starting at 430 Celsius- TABLE 1.6 Typical Creep Rates and Rupture Stresses for Structural Steels at Various Temperatures, basically lay out the primary requirements.
see https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=Structural+Steel+Designers+Handboo...
When I looked at this several years ago (after many rounds of- who the fuck the are these people? and what the fuck the did they think they were doing?) I came to the conclusion that: IF, IF, and IF, THEN "it is possible" (strictly looking at the engineering and the published building specs) - BUT that possible outcome depends on exactly what damage occurred at the core of the building immediately after a mass of x thousand kgs traveling at y velocity impacted the building, and potentially altered the load/stress distribution - and the evidence to either support or disprove any conclusion has long since been recycled and wasn't documented properly in the initial "investigation" (and I wouldn't use the word investigation, even in quotes, for what was done in response to WT7).
An open-source foundation-to-roof electronic reconstruction (revit/bim model) would at least allow proper documentation and debate on of the IF's (with a fuck ton of wild goose chases, because just like an excel spreadsheet- you can achieve (almost) any bottom line by a skilled individual adjusting the ASSUMPTIONS (and given what NIST provided, assumptions are really what we're left with). But there's some misguided (if well meaning) oversimplifications on 911research.wtc7 such as "It may take well over a ten-fold reduction in strength to cause a structural failure" - ignoring the linguistic subtitles of that sentence, the building is a complex system and the "over-engineering" varies depending on which stress one is talking about (compression, shear, etc) and the specific location within the structure. moreover all of that goes out the window and up in smoke (literally) once velocity and acceleration are no longer 0. But the narrative of the collapse has it's own issues (and some of which aren't even explained by a controlled demolition)...
Someday, someone will open their mouth and have the documentation to back up their assertion, but I think it is more likely to involve WT7 or the Pentagon than the Twin Towers. Hopefully that day comes before we're left with digging up corpses to desecrate or corruption of blood to extract justice the guilty.
In the meantime, as much as I dislike many of the cost cutting practices and inventions that have become industry "standards" over the last couple decades, I do have a fetish for steel reinforced concrete. If the WTC designers had simply added a little concrete- it would have prevented deformation of the core (vertical load bearing) columns (deformation due to a combination of increased temperature and increased stresses). Sort of like how a one gallon milk jug bong with water in it is harder to deform with bare hands than an empty plastic container, even though the water doesn't do much much against a speeding bullet at the shooting range the next day... (weak analogy but "pot steel" set a high bar)
You missed the point completely. Straight over your head, no matter how tall Tom is. Anger does that. Makes you react without thinking. Think before you type, and you could have saved yourself a trip to Wikipedia. I might have thought that my "physiques" and "thermos dynamics" would have given you a clue, given that you posit yourself a scientist.
I specifically used the highest flash point of kerosene to note that it is still below the temp required to boil water, yet "somehow" kerosene stoves can boil water. It is that "somehow" that I would like this fellow to explore. Then he might know why a blacksmith could do his job, too. Perhaps, just perhaps, he might come to some understanding of how the integrity of steel could be compromised by temperatures far below its melting point, and if he tosses in a whole lot of office furniture, computer monitors, rugs, paneling, etc.---all afire after being ignited by the Jet-A---he might at least consider how a compromised material, trying to withstand combined weight of 20-35 upper floors (in WTCI & II) or the odd atrium structure of WTC7, might give way. Obviously he can still disagree.
I accept your apology, so no need to post it.
So you are intentional. The wonderful aspect of the NSA Computer Database is that it will still exist post collapse. The very weapon that they use against us will be turned over to the Patriot so that we can use it against the traitor.
It is something to consider.
Chindit...I am sorry. It needs to be written. You are correct. It went right over my head.
This is sincere. No sarcasm is intended. Urban Redneck pointed it out in spades.
It is called Tunnel Vision and I am also subject to that.
"And guess what bitchezzz...jet fuel doesn't melt steel!"
Nobody said it did. Nor was steel melted. Molten metal does not mean molten steel. Ever seen plane fires, like the one in San Francisco last year, where the top of the fuselage melts?
Airplane fusilage skins are made of Aluminum Alloys.
Aluminum oxides in Fires. It burns. The byproduct is Aluminum Oxide...Corundum. It will melt in reducing, Oxygen Deprived Atmospheres. You can melt Aluminum as long as it is not in contact with a Hot fire.
It is funny that you may not know that the PROPELLANT for the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters was Aluminum Perchlorate Composite Propellant. Of course you have never fueled your personal Rockets with this type of Propellant whereas I, on the other hand, have.
I like Rockets. They are just too easy to Warhead. Without warheads they are quite LEGAL.
Everybody needs to take up Rocketry as a Sport.
Who needs a Gun and bullets?
Fuselage is not steel.
To investigate a crime, we first need to establish what happened.
Did the steel melt? NO
Did the towers explode? NO
Did the towers collapse? NO
The towers were turned to dust on live TV.
Start here:
http://drjudywood.co.uk/
Yes, the steel melted. Yes the towers absolutely follow a pattern exactly for a demolition job. Yes, the towers did collapse. There was no alien energy weapon used or needed. Simple RDX and thermite, and a couple off-the-books tomahawks are all that was needed. The siesmic analysis also match conventional building implosion perfectly.
"Yes, the steel melted. Yes the towers absolutely follow a pattern exactly for a demolition job. "
The steel did not melt. The patten followed that of a natural collapse due to fire. The east side of WTC2 was struck and the top 30 floors fell over to the east, after fire weakened the building.
moneybitch,
Did you ever read Orwell's 1984? Remember the character named "Winston"? He worked for the government propoganda Ministry of Truth, and do you know how he ended up? The regime killed him after a whole lot of torture. "But that's fiction" you say... Well, it's actually the rule rather than the exception in history, from Mao, to Pol Pot. Once your usefulness is done, they will not think twice about disposing of you.
It's a very dangerous like of work supporting a murderous regime. Historically, one side or the other always comes for the useful idiots.
The steel didn't need to melt. It just had to get heated to the point where it lost it's strength, then all the weight of the upper floors could slowly start bending the steel load bearing beams. Once the beams started deforming, the huge weight it was holding up from above quickly increased the rate of deformation. And one the towers got a little inertia of movement on weakened steel beams, the laws of physics dictated that it was going to snap the weakened beams and then start pancaking down with irrestible force.
The lower columns were supporting the same weight before during and after impact. If floor deck crumbled and hit the floor below, there is a little extra energy that would need to be absorbed. Engineers came out of the woodwork immediately afterwards indicating that the official story made no sense. If TPTB are in the way, most professionals unfortunately will just quietly move on.
"The lower columns were supporting the same weight before during and after impact. If floor deck crumbled and hit the floor below, there is a little extra energy that would need to be absorbed. Engineers came out of the woodwork immediately afterwards indicating that the official story made no sense"
The New York Times contacted engineers and architects for a story the next day. None had a problem with the idea that the fire caused the collapse, even though they did not know all the details at that time.
In WTC2, at least one truss could be seen sagging due to the fire. The collapse occured where the east exterior wall was bowed in. The floor could not absorb the energy from the falling debris, in its weakened state.
Firstly, you can hold a steel I-beam under a kerosene fire until the sun burns out and it will never melt, weaken or stress.
Secondly, the beams didn't bend. There is vast amounts of evidence that the metal went molten, and the smoking gun, nano-thermite is still in the dust.
Pancaking doesn't happen. In building 7 alone you had 90,000 tons of steel and concrete support system. It doesn't go away if you cut one or two. Redundancy is built in, and those buildings support systems are designed for 150-200% load, meaning you could have stacked another WTC building on top of the existing one and not had the buildings fail. Also, if you were able to cut an entire floor of structural support systems, it would stop at the next series of intact supports, and certainly slow down.
For a real world representation: imagine a VW, or a smart car traveling at 60MPH straight towards a semi tractor trailer head-on. The semi wins the battle and doesn't pancake.
"Firstly, you can hold a steel I-beam under a kerosene fire until the sun burns out and it will never melt, weaken or stress."
Firstly, that doesn't matter. The kerosine set the combutible contents of the Towers on fire. The fire burning from the combustibles on each floor, burned hot enough to weaken the structural steel. If you look at the flames coming out the windows, some were beyond floor to ceiling in height. The out of control fires in the Towers were definitely hot enough to weaken the steel.
Moneybots, I like to repeat a quote from Jesse Ventura: It is common sense that barbeque grills do NOT melt when being used. The sudden collapse of the World Trade Center buildings is the same as asserting that someone was barbequeing, when suddenly their grill just melted and collapsed. Steel never behaves like that in the presence of ordinary fires. Only extraordinary chemical or other energy sources could cause the WTC buildings to suddenly collapse at near free fall speed, all the way, straight down, with hardly any of the core columns left still standing.
ONLY CONTROLLED DEMOLITION COULD DO THAT, WHICH IS WHY 9/11 MUST HAVE BEEN AN INSIDE JOB, FALSE FLAG ATTACK. ANY OTHER VIEW, LIKE THE OFFICIAL STORY, REQUIRES ABSURD VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWS OF PHYSICS, WHICH DELIBERATELY IGNORE THE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE THAT THERE WAS CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
um, no. Unless the building was made of thermite, which would break every building code known to man. That building wasn't going to come down the way it did without a lot of help. Now you're just playing around till your shift is over. Go get a real job helping people instead of supporting a murderous regime.
moneybots is severely outclassed when it concerns Advanced Education. (Of course we are all "Low Brows" here.) That is the reason that we trade markets, understand esoteric concepts which escape the General Masses, can criticize the mishandling of the Economy with marked clarity, amongst other attributes.
LMAO. I am having a lot of fun ficking with him. In fact I am pleased that when his employers read just how ineffective that he has been in his vain attempts that they will not be at all pleased. How many of these guys have we handled in the past?
Think about it this way...Every Dollar that the Government spends on trolls is a Dollar less that they can spend on "Defending our Liberties"...meaning RAPING CHILDREN OVER IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN AS THE PEDOPHILES WHICH THEY ARE.
Here is a video where a Soldier admits that he, and nine of his buddies, RAPED an Iraqi Girl. That was not ever prosecuted so those troops are over in the States raping American Children.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKb5NXWi_B4
Now that money is better spent abusing us "Low Brows" on Zerohedge than on RAPING CHILDREN.
Those people need to be hunted down and Hanged by the Neck until DEAD.
what happens if a VW
hits a trailer full of pancakes...
The VW is demolished while the Trailer Full of Pancakes remains pretty much intact. (I am assuming a Semi Trilaer full of Pancakes.)
That is the Major Problem with the collapse according to the Official Story. The Mass of the Upper Sections of the Buildings were much less than the Mass below.
The problem with the Official Story is that it ignores the Physical Laws of Conservation of Momentum and the corollary Law of Conservation of Energy.
The Tops of the Buildings would have been demolished leaving the Botom Floors pretty much intact...just like the VW smashing into a Semi Trailer loaded with Pancakes.
I have never seen the aftermath of a Car impacting a Semi and both the car and Semi were demolished into dust. Generally the Car, being much less massive, is demolished while the Semi stays structurally intact.
"The problem with the Official Story is that it ignores the Physical Laws of Conservation of Momentum and the corollary Law of Conservation of Energy."
Actually, it doesn't ignore any physical laws. Once the natural collapse began, there was no stopping it.
There was nothing NATURAL about that collapse. There was not enough Potential Energy to overcome the Structural Designs. The Energy added to the system from the Aircraft Impacts was insufficient to overcome the Structural Designs.
It required even more Energy than that.
Energy is always conseved. That corollary is derived from Newton's Laws of Motion which declared that Momentum is conserved. Kinetic Energy is the summation of the product of all Momentum and infinitesimal changes in velocity.
That corollary forms the base premise of the study of Thermodynamics. Physical Laws are inviolable and cannot be rewritten at the whim of an honest Government.
But, of course, in an Orwellian Dystopia, 2 + 2 = 5 as Winston discovered.
Viva le resistance.
"There was nothing NATURAL about that collapse. There was not enough Potential Energy to overcome the Structural Designs"
That is false. There was a tremendous amount of potential energy to overcome structual design, otherwise the buildings would never have fallen, even in a demo.
you're overwhelming us with your technical expertise and empirical data
If it was a controlled demolition, don't you think the people in the building would have wondered why there was det cord all over the place and that there were holes cut in the walls to place explosives?
"seismic analysis"? By who? You do believe everything you read on the Internet. In that case, I am a Nigerian Prince and I have $18 million dollars I want to get out of my country. If you send me $50,000 and your bank account number, I will give you half ($9 million) once the funds have been transferred.
You don't need holes in the wall when you have dropped ceilings at 9 feet typically covering up the decking at usually 12 feet for the upstairs floor. Nobody would ever see the explosives secured into the insulation above.
You don't need wire when you have telephones or other transmitting devices to trigger detonation.
I typically attempt to be kind during these little parties, but in this particular instance I am forced to quote Bugs, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_Kh7nLplWo
WTC was built to demolish. After a decade, there is plenty of literature to be found confirming this. Many floors of the twin towers had never been occupied and were nothing but shells of construction. This building made a man a billionaire extraordinaire after a 6 week investment. He missed having breakfast that day. In fact, not one jewish person died on 9-11 that I am aware of - in a city with a population of Jews equavalent to Israel. The passport, WTC 7, the fleeing of the bin laden family during a CONTINENTAL NO FLY ZONE FUCKER.
DEAL WITH IT. WE KNOW. WE WON'T STOP UNTIL THE PERPETRATORS ARE IN GITMO WHERE THEY BELONG. EVERY FUCKING ONE OF THEM.
"WTC was built to demolish. After a decade, there is plenty of literature to be found confirming this. Many floors of the twin towers had never been occupied and were nothing but shells of construction."
I saw a floor map with all the businesses which were on each floor of each Tower, published in the newspaper, just after the attack. I didn't notice any unoccupied floors.
The Litmus Test
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21pPpYw_axQ