JasonC SBB

I was just as skeptical about this whole deal as most people are, but I slogged through the (tons of) info and carefully came to my own conclusions, instead of jumping to a foregone conclusion.

JasonC SBB

Like I said the explosive theory have unanswered q's too, but the 911 comission conclusion has waaaaaaay more.

Ben

iTrader: (33)

This is written by my least favorite publication of all time, but you might find it an entertaining read Jason
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=1

JasonC SBB

I've read it and I've read the rebuttals of the people they were trying to debunk.

I have Griffin's book "debunking" the PopMech debunkers.

I am still leaning to explosives. Understand it took me a looooong time to come to my own conclusions. Same as you guys, I found it very, very hard to believe.

This presentation is the best single place I have seen for this info, which is why I linked it.

drewbroo

iTrader: (2)

Natural gas is an explosive, also superheated jet fuel is too. Thats about as far as I will agree on this with you.

Also people don't realize the scale involved here. This was one of the largest buildings in the world. There are not many buildings close to its scale brought down in a controlled detonation.

elesjuan

iTrader: (11)

First off, Who really cares?

Second off, Who REALLY cares?

According to Kanye West George Bush blew up the world trade center.. so we should all just believe him and get on with our lives.

I'm not wasting a second of my life reading some bullshit presentation put together by some left wing group hell bent on convincing the American people that George Bush secretively planted det cord, explosives , and cut supporting beams in the building, THEEEEEEEN hijacked 3 aircraft to run into the building. I'd rather go stab myself in the face with a ******* plastic spork. :fm:

elesjuan

iTrader: (11)

Ahem. Jet fuels flash point is 98 degrees F. Jason, do some research on what caused TWA-800 to blow up after takeoff. 50 Gallons of 138 degree jet fuel, and a single spark.

drewbroo

iTrader: (2)

I heard it was Bush and Cheney riding a Canadian cruise missile fired from a French submarine in DC on Sunday.

kotomile

iTrader: (24)

Tell me what load a fireplace grill bears..

JasonC SBB

They're not a "left wing" group. I for one ******* hate left wingers. The presentation also doesn't say "Bush did it". It just says "explosives did it". Hell, maybe the terrorists got in there.

If you don't want to "waste your time", then don't read the presentation, but don't also say that those who've read it are wrong.

JasonC SBB

The presentation goes through this argument. The temperature needed to make the steel beams lose half its strength is higher than what is plausible to have been reached by the fire. The design margin of the building is such that on a low-wind day like that, the steel is nowhere near stressed to half.

Multiple skyscrapers in the world have burned for far longer and did NOT collapse. One burnded for 17 hours, IIRC, with no deformation of the structural steel.

The other thing is if it had melted from the fire, the thing should have sagged assymetrically, not collapsed vertically at free-fall speed.

JasonC SBB

That is neither here nor there.

JasonC SBB

There were also "squibs" evident in the videos - industry term for random mistimed explosions.

Building 7 collapsed with no airplane crashing into it. That looked even more like a classic demolition.

JasonC SBB

2 wars were started on the pretext of 911, 5,000 soldiers died, and 500k Iraqis died, and you have paid something like $3,000 in taxes to pay for the war.

Exhondaman

I can't watch the slideshow because I'm at work but let's get to the heart of the matter, WHO? and WHY? And if that website is affiliated with "Loose Change" at ALL, it's an automatic nut-job website.

And if it's a timed explosion, how do explain the fricking planes? And don't tell me they were missiles. And do you actually think the planners could keep that BIG of a secret for so long? Is Osama playing checkers with Cheney in the Batcave?

I've read through numorous reports but the most convincing one was done by Frontline (PBS), they debunked every conspiracy theory and were VERY in depth in their investigation. And in case you haven't noticed, Frontline and PBS in general are extremely left-slanting in their programming. I remember some experts from the show said that nothing of this magnitude has ever happened before. Sure, there's been smaller aircraft, but never a jet-liner. So for the architects/engineers to say "this could never happen", I say ," **** happens". Nothing is predictable. Remember also this was the SECOND attempt to topple the WTC by terrorists, or was the first one an "inside" job also? Well, I'm sure SOMEONE could cherry-pics facts and say that it was......

kotomile

iTrader: (24)

Uh-huh.. and what sort of ginormous aircraft buried itself within such building before the fire..

also, once the building "sagged asymmetrically", the stress concentration on the beams grew, leading to collapse.

paul

iTrader: (21)

it seems someone is taking the forum title of < insert BS here > way too literally.

is there code in the software were users can ignore threads started by certain users? has jason posted anything helpful/useful so far on this forum?

his last 3 threads are:

-The 911 challenge thread
-Ron Paul's economic revitalization plan
-The history of money and banking

The last place I want to discuss politics with some fucktard is mt.net

JasonC SBB

It's not. The presentation is made by the people on the website ARCHITECTS and ENGINEERS for 911 truth.

There were planes. There were explosives. They are not mutually exclusive.

Doesn't need that many people.. just a bunch to place the explosives, a mastermind, everyone else on a need to know basis. The way covert operations are done is that the people let it on a few damning secrets are threatened NOT with their lives, but with lives of their relatives and friends. I agree it MUST be hard to do this... that's why I'm saying, look at the physical evidence.

Left slanting or not is irrelevant. The pres'n explains PBS's misleading computer graphics of the building collapse.

The building's designers DID consider a 707, which is about the same size as the planes that hit. The presentation has an interview of one of the designers on this VERY topic.

And I say "look at the evidence" of both camps.

Irrelevant to the physical evidence and the explosives theory.

This is why I spent lots of hours reading both the PopMech article, Griffin's reply, AND this presentation.

JasonC SBB

Check out the presentation. It discusses all these.

JasonC SBB

One of my earliest posts:
https://www.miataturbo.net/forum/sho...ighlight=dwell