Some 9/11 enjoyment boys. Satire on the doubtful conspiracy

[Cap]

For someone with a degree in history I think you should look to the past and Clinton who disregarded advice from Oliver North to kill that rag head Osama.  Clinton could have taken this operation out years ago but didn't.  The same could have been done with Saddam when HW was in office but nobody wanted that so the administration stopped.  We could have rolled over their asses easily.

[240 is Back]

blah blah blah
you know what i'm talking about, scroll up.

i seriously don't.  I'm blasting 'ride the lightning', cooking oatmeal, and building a pic gallery and there are 4 pages here.  headache, man.

[240 is Back]

For someone with a degree in history I think you should look to the past and Clinton who disregarded advice from Oliver North to kill that rag head Osama.  Clinton could have taken this operation out years ago but didn't.  The same could have been done with Saddam when HW was in office but nobody wanted that so the administration stopped.  We could have rolled over their asses easily.

Clinton fucked up, this is absolutely true.  I never denied that.  I can't stand clinton.  I voted against him twice

I don't see how this affects the Bush discussion.  If I get caught in bed with 2 strippers, I can't tell my woman "hey, hitler killed 6 million people!  banging 2 broads is nothing compared to that!"

[OzmO]

i seriously don't.  I'm blasting 'ride the lightning', cooking oatmeal, and building a pic gallery and there are 4 pages here.  headache, man.

Do you have a picture of every side of the building YES or NO?

If yes:  post pics of all sides.

If no, your position is even weaker.

[Cap]

Clinton fucked up, this is absolutely true.  I never denied that.  I can't stand clinton.  I voted against him twice

I don't see how this affects the Bush discussion.  If I get caught in bed with 2 strippers, I can't tell my woman "hey, hitler killed 6 million people!  banging 2 broads is nothing compared to that!"

Hmmmmm.  Clinton kills Osama.  Al Qeada leadership weakened and easily defeated.  Any plans in Afghanistan much easier, conspiracy or not.  Hmmmm.....

[240 is Back]

Do you have a picture of every side of the building YES or NO?
If yes:  post pics of all sides.
If no, your position is even weaker.

This photo shows the north face of Building 7 on the afternoon of September 11, 2001. (It is the tall building behind lighter-colored buildings to either side.) There are no signs of damage to this face, such as broken windows, but fires are visible inside the building.

[240 is Back]

[

Half-way through Building 7's 6.5-second plunge, streamers suggestive of demolition charges emerged from the facade.

[OzmO]

does the pic conclusively show "all" the damage to the building?

[240 is Back]

smoke was coming out of the back pretty heavily.  here you also see the penthouse kink (as you would with a controlled demo) first.

[240 is Back]

[OzmO]

[

Half-way through Building 7's 6.5-second plunge, streamers suggestive of demolition charges emerged from the facade.

the body and design of a bumble bee suggests it shouldn't fly.  but it does.

With the absence of the facts, single issues such as streamers do not close the case that it was a demolition.

[240 is Back]

does the pic conclusively show "all" the damage to the building?

gee whiz, doc.  we have one side with bad smoke but no flames showing.  We have 2 sides with small fires and barely any smoke.  we have one side looking pretty good.

I can show you many buildings built same way, same size, same era, which burned much higher, hotter and longer, and never fell.  And certainly didn't fall in 6.5 seconds into powder.



Ozmo, seriously bro... do you believe the concrete and steel from the entire building framework just vaporized in 6.5 seconds?

[240 is Back]

the body and design of a bumble bee suggests it shouldn't fly.  but it does.

With the absence of the facts, single issues such as streamers do not close the case that it was a demolition.

streamers.
classic kink.
explosions caught on videotape.
firefighters, police, reporters, residents all told it was about to come down.
visually, no other explanation in human history other than a controlled demo looks like this.
silverstein saying 'we made the decision to pull it'.
ejection jets top right corner
building falling into its own basement
pyroclastic features of flow - rolled low right over water- seen only in volcanoes and in controlled demo - never in any other event.

should i go on?  streamers alone, no.  but all this?

[Brixtonbulldog]

streamers.
classic kink.
explosions caught on videotape.
firefighters, police, reporters, residents all told it was about to come down.
visually, no other explanation in human history other than a controlled demo looks like this.
silverstein saying 'we made the decision to pull it'.
ejection jets top right corner
building falling into its own basement
pyroclastic features of flow - rolled low right over water- seen only in volcanoes and in controlled demo - never in any other event.

should i go on?  streamers alone, no.  but all this?

Looks more like you're seeing what you WANT to see.  During the chaos that would've happened inside any of these buildings during thier collapse I'm sure all kinds of interesting and unanticipated reactions would occur.  You're desperately trying to ascribe great meaning to things that could've happened for any number or reasons.  You just WANT to believe there's some massive cover up and in the process your rationality went out the window. 

You should really stop these attempts to convince people.  You're only hurting your case (however outlandish and unsupported it is) and making yourself look like anyone else with an agenda to large it clouds your reason.

[240 is Back]

Looks more like you're seeing what you WANT to see.  During the chaos that would've happened inside any of these buildings during thier collapse I'm sure all kinds of interesting and unanticipated reactions would occur.  You're desperately trying to ascribe great meaning to things that could've happened for any number or reasons.  You just WANT to believe there's some massive cover up and in the process your rationality went out the window. 

oh wait... so you're "sure" that all kinds of interesting things happened.  Oh, okay.  I guess we can ignore physics (faster than freefall speed ignoring all resistance), firefighting history (much larger fires have never brought down a building), witnesses and video/audio (explosions, warnings), and all the other good stuff.

We don't need this pile of clue which point to a controlled demoluition.  no.  We have the "sure" unfounded beliefs of a guy who hasn't researched it.  Prob solved!

You should really stop these attempts to convince people.  You're only hurting your case (however outlandish and unsupported it is) and making yourself look like anyone else with an agenda to large it clouds your reason.

actually, the 911 funboys started this one, to bash the skeptics.  after them tugging each other off for 10 posts, i chimed in with facts.  Sorry if you don't like em.  tell your friends to stop making threads like these, and I'll quit responding.

[OzmO]

gee whiz, doc.  we have one side with bad smoke but no flames showing.  We have 2 sides with small fires and barely any smoke.  we have one side looking pretty good.

I can show you many buildings built same way, same size, same era, which burned much higher, hotter and longer, and never fell.  And certainly didn't fall in 6.5 seconds into powder.



Ozmo, seriously bro... do you believe the concrete and steel from the entire building framework just vaporized in 6.5 seconds?

first off, the building didn't vaporize,  it collapsed (more spin dribble)

secondly:  only a someone who easily manipulated into jumping to conclusions, would conclude from pics showing partial views of the sides of building that that was all the things going with the building. 

[240 is Back]

first off, the building didn't vaporize,  it collapsed (more spin dribble)

No.

a 500+ foot building would form more than a 20 foot pile of debris.  And that giant cloud you see rolling a mile into the sea- that is composed of all the concrete in the building.  That's where it all went.  And THAT is the key - Oz. 

If you look at a pancake collapse of buildings, they look like books stacked.  Look at that s. american nightclub.  What you see at WTC7 is the conversion of all the concrete in the building to a uniform, fine powder, which is what composes that cloud.  The cloud isn't dust, man!

[OzmO]

streamers.
classic kink.
explosions caught on videotape.
firefighters, police, reporters, residents all told it was about to come down.
visually, no other explanation in human history other than a controlled demo looks like this.
silverstein saying 'we made the decision to pull it'.
ejection jets top right corner
building falling into its own basement
pyroclastic features of flow - rolled low right over water- seen only in volcanoes and in controlled demo - never in any other event.

should i go on?  streamers alone, no.  but all this?

-  There are explosions but you don;t what they are caused by (actual explosions or explosions from things in the building like boilers, transformers etc...) - therefore inconclusive

-  the people that said it was about to come down, it doesn't take much to think that in the context of what was going on a the time, but what does that prove?  nothing. - therefore inconclusive

-  visually, no other explanation in human history other than a controlled demo looks like this?  so there are never things that happen everyday that baffle scientist?  doesn't prove a demolition becuase of the way it fell - therefore inconclusive

-  Silverstien:  this has been explained.  now if he said we blew the building of blow it then it woul dhave been a different story - therefore inconclusive

-  ejection jets top right corner???  explain please

-  building falling into its own basement?  make total sense to me.  these buildings aren't like wooden blocks-  therefore inconclusive

-  pyroclastic features of flow - rolled low right over water- seen only in volcanoes and in controlled demo - never in any other event,  how many other events to we have buildings collapse?  - therefore inconclusive


try again 240.

[OzmO]

No.

a 500+ foot building would form more than a 20 foot pile of debris.  And that giant cloud you see rolling a mile into the sea- that is composed of all the concrete in the building.  That's where it all went.  And THAT is the key - Oz. 

If you look at a pancake collapse of buildings, they look like books stacked.  Look at that s. american nightclub.  What you see at WTC7 is the conversion of all the concrete in the building to a uniform, fine powder, which is what composes that cloud.  The cloud isn't dust, man!

considering 2 things:

1.  it fell into it's basement
2.  The size of the pile from the WTC's

these 2 explain the 20ft pile.

[240 is Back]

-  There are explosions but you don;t what they are caused by (actual explosions or explosions from things in the building like boilers, transformers etc...) - therefore inconclusive

-  the people that said it was about to come down, it doesn't take much to think that in the context of what was going on a the time, but what does that prove?  nothing. - therefore inconclusive

-  visually, no other explanation in human history other than a controlled demo looks like this?  so there are never things that happen everyday that baffle scientist?  doesn't prove a demolition becuase of the way it fell - therefore inconclusive

-  Silverstien:  this has been explained.  now if he said we blew the building of blow it then it woul dhave been a different story - therefore inconclusive

-  ejection jets top right corner???  explain please

-  building falling into its own basement?  make total sense to me.  these buildings aren't like wooden blocks-  therefore inconclusive

-  pyroclastic features of flow - rolled low right over water- seen only in volcanoes and in controlled demo - never in any other event,  how many other events to we have buildings collapse?  - therefore inconclusive


try again 240.

You know, with all those "inconclusives", it's awfully weird the 911 commission ignored WTC7, and NIST refused to test any of the debris for bomb residue.



-  ejection jets top right corner???  explain please

I'll dig up a pic.  From the CBS angle, top right, you see about the top 10 stories eject smoke simultaneously as if explosives were used.  You'll say inconclusive, which is fine.  but aside from Silversteins' PBS confession, we're not going to get a written confession.  *unless you order the PBS transcript

The clouds should be the key:
3) Almost all of the non-steel building materials and contents were pulverized into talcum powdersize (sub 100 micron) dust particles. This took the form of the dense churning dust clouds thatexpanded to enormous size as they raced down the surrounding streets at tremendous velocity andwith clearly defined boundaries, depositing most of the mass of the buildings outside of the perimeterof their original footprints.

[240 is Back]

considering 2 things:

1.  it fell into it's basement
2.  The size of the pile from the WTC's

these 2 explain the 20ft pile.

The steel remained.  All non-steel was powderized as i said above.  it's reasonable to believe that 500 feet of building contains 20 to 40 feet of metal when stacked.

it's also reasonable to expect to see a few stories of concrete, etc, right?

Think about it.  47 stories converted to 2 stories.  How DOES this happen?

[Cap]

No.

a 500+ foot building would form more than a 20 foot pile of debris.  And that giant cloud you see rolling a mile into the sea- that is composed of all the concrete in the building.  That's where it all went.  And THAT is the key - Oz. 

If you look at a pancake collapse of buildings, they look like books stacked.  Look at that s. american nightclub.  What you see at WTC7 is the conversion of all the concrete in the building to a uniform, fine powder, which is what composes that cloud.  The cloud isn't dust, man!

Again dismissing evidence.  Stuff I posted showed that the inside of the WTC was mostly air.  They likened it to an egg crate, thus accounting for the 20 ft pile.  240 dismissing evidence once again.

[240 is Back]

Again dismissing evidence.  Stuff I posted showed that the inside of the WTC was mostly air.  They likened it to an egg crate, thus accounting for the 20 ft pile.  240 dismissing evidence once again.

cap86,

for the record,

1) what was in the giant cloud that rolled to the sea?

[240 is Back]

From the looks of the video I would say debris from the building....

Correct.  It's actually all the non-steel parts of the building.  They are converted to talcum powdersize -sub 100 micron- dust particles.  The only thing they found in that pile was steel.

Now, the question becomes, what energy caused every bit of concrete, desk, chair, carpet, glass, light, etc in that building to convert itself into these dust particles in 6.5 seconds?

Gravity alone cannot.  Never has.  Never will.  You cna measure the 9.8 m/s2 if you want.  It is physically not possible. 

Think about it man... everything converted to talcum powder consistency.

[Cap]

It's not plausible for concrete and what ever else made up the WTC floors would be burning for a while and already be at a point to where, at the point of collapse, it would spread like that?