Explosions on 9/11

[GridIronAssassin#1 0]

 

What's exploding? Is this one of the planes?

[supermike80 2,083]

 

What's exploding? Is this one of the planes?

 

:tinfoilhat:

 

[Sho Nuff 720]

Shocker....back with another conspiracy......

[davebg 0]

Shocker....back with another conspiracy......

No, not another conspiracy...it's the same one that he always brings up.

 

He creates a new thread as opposed to just bumping the old ones just so everyone doesn't see that he's already been pwned.

[Sho Nuff 720]

No, not another conspiracy...it's the same one that he always brings up.

 

He creates a new thread as opposed to just bumping the old ones just so everyone doesn't see that he's already been pwned.

 

True...what I meant was another new piece to it...every little thing he brings up gets refuted...and as predicted he comes back with something else.

 

As for this video...who knows what it is...the video is so short there i no telling when it all happened. It appeared that at least one of the towers was already down given the amount of dust in the air...

[edjr 6,898]

I'm actually a believer in the conspiracy partially. HOWEVER, i bet that sound is the second plane crashing into the second tower.

[Sho Nuff 720]

I'm actually a believer in the conspiracy partially. HOWEVER, i bet that sound is the second plane crashing into the second tower.

 

Considering the debris and dust around, at least one of the towers was already down...meaning both planes had already hit...

[Mack 1 6]

I find it funny how people totally dismiss even the possibility of a "conspiracy." I'm not saying it happened here, but for folks to categorically poo-poo the idea is narrow-minded and naive.

[Sho Nuff 720]

I find it funny how people totally dismiss even the possibility of a "conspiracy." I'm not saying it happened here, but for folks to categorically poo-poo the idea is narrow-minded and naive.

 

I dismiss plenty of things that lack any credible evidence to support it...especially when a new "theory" pops up every few weeks...gets debated...completely dismantled and taken apart...and the person who posts it just brings up something else...rather than admitting that what he brings to the table is full of shiat!!!

[parrot 789]

I could offer several reasonable possibilities, but instead why don't you tell us what you think is exploding GridIronAssassin? I'm sure that will be far more entertaining.

 

I find it funny how people totally dismiss even the possibility of a "conspiracy." I'm not saying it happened here, but for folks to categorically poo-poo the idea is narrow-minded and naive.

I don't dismiss the possibility of a "conspiracy". In fact I'm quite certain it was a "conspiracy". The question is who the conspirators were, and I tend to lean towards the ones that all the evidence (not to be confused with "speculation") points to.

 

Occam's Razor. Check it out.

[surferskin 31]

I find it funny how people totally dismiss even the possibility of a "conspiracy." I'm not saying it happened here, but for folks to categorically poo-poo the idea is narrow-minded and naive.

yeah, us dismissing random conspiracies with shaky evidence( to say the least) makes us naive.

[yostevo 0]

Occam's Razor. Check it out.

 

Contact is a good movie.

[Mack 1 6]

yeah, us dismissing random conspiracies with shaky evidence( to say the least) makes us naive.

I'm not talking only about 9/11, I'm referring to conspiracies as a whole, with the slighest hint at such a thing being met with lethal levels of cynicism.

 

"What, our country involved in a conspiracy?!?! Preposterous!!" seems to be the standard response to such claims. And alls I'm saying is let's not TOTALLY dismiss the possibility of conspiracy on ANYTHING.

 

Were there explosions at the WTC on that day? Who knows, but the POSSIBILITY exists that there were. That's my point.

[davebg 0]

I'm not talking only about 9/11, I'm referring to conspiracies as a whole, with the slighest hint at such a thing being met with lethal levels of cynicism.

 

"What, our country involved in a conspiracy?!?! Preposterous!!" seems to be the standard response to such claims. And alls I'm saying is let's not TOTALLY dismiss the possibility of conspiracy on ANYTHING.

 

Were there explosions at the WTC on that day? Who knows, but the POSSIBILITY exists that there were. That's my point.

The POSSIBILITY exists that aliens are going to hijack my car tonight as I'm driving on a secluded country road on my way up to VT, take me to their home planet and force me to marry their queen, who is a dead ringer for Scarlett Johansson.

 

The PROBABILITY of that actually happening? Notsomuch.

[Mack 1 6]

The POSSIBILITY exists that aliens are going to hijack my car tonight as I'm driving on a secluded country road on my way up to VT, take me to their home planet and force me to marry their queen, who is a dead ringer for Scarlett Johansson.

 

The PROBABILITY of that actually happening? Notsomuch.

[surferskin 31]

I'm not talking only about 9/11, I'm referring to conspiracies as a whole, with the slighest hint at such a thing being met with lethal levels of cynicism.

 

"What, our country involved in a conspiracy?!?! Preposterous!!" seems to be the standard response to such claims. And alls I'm saying is let's not TOTALLY dismiss the possibility of conspiracy on ANYTHING.

 

Were there explosions at the WTC on that day? Who knows, but the POSSIBILITY exists that there were. That's my point.

alright, farakan...you found out who blew up the levees yet too?

[Riddlen 1]

[Mack 1 6]

alright, farakan...you found out who blew up the levees yet too?

I've been called worse, but to answer your question, O.J. and I are teaming up to investigate those claims while we're taking a break from looking for the real killers in L.A.

[Sho Nuff 720]

I've been called worse, but to answer your question, O.J. and I are teaming up to investigate those claims while we're taking a break from looking for the real killers in L.A.

 

So how is the golf game?

Must be good since the search for the real killers has included some of the finest courses in the country...

[TD Ryan2 316]

 

What's exploding? Is this one of the planes?

 

 

DUDE!

 

I was just thinking that YouTube would be the PERFECT place to find scientific evidence that shows us what REALLY happened on 9/11.

[GridIronAssassin#1 0]

I'm actually a believer in the conspiracy partially. HOWEVER, i bet that sound is the second plane crashing into the second tower.

 

That's what I was questioning. I didn't know if anyone had any ideas what that sound was. The 2nd plane seems like a possible candidate of choice.

 

However to believe in the official report, one has to believe that steel temperatures got hot enough for the steel to fail because of the fire. I am trying very hard trying to find evidence to support the official theory, but I'm still searching. Here is some testing done in Project 3 headed up by Frank Gayle of NIST. However, as I look through some of this, I don't see any evidence that the steel got anywhere near the required temperatures for failure. I think 1150 degrees farenheit is listed as a temperature that steel would be at half strength. I'm not sure I agree with that number since this is high strength steel, but even if we use that number, there are no signs of it in the paint deformation tests conducted. Can somebody find any evidence? If you scroll down to the 6th page it says that most perimeter panels( 157 of 160 locations mapped) saw no temperature greater than 250 degrees Celsius or 482 degrees farenheit despite precollapse exposure to fire on 13 panels. They mentioned that no spheroidization was observed on 136 samples, and thus no temperatures over 625 Celsius. I can't see how this fire making the steel fail story is possible.

 

NIST TESTS for Steel Temperatures

[gocolts 300]

 

at the very end Rosie talks about the building 7 collapse

[jets24 6]

You tinfoil heads really need to make a decision. Either President Bush is the biggest bumbling, rambling, incoherent, self righteous baffoon that you have all continued to say he is or he is the greatest mind in the world to be able to pull off a conspiracy like this. Seriously, make up your mind already. You can't have it both ways. The guy can't even get somebody fired or send a memo without it being leaked to the press but for some reason you now think this government can keep a secret of this magnitude and have not one person come forward and admit the plan? Please.

[Sho Nuff 720]

That's what I was questioning. I didn't know if anyone had any ideas what that sound was. The 2nd plane seems like a possible candidate of choice.

 

However to believe in the official report, one has to believe that steel temperatures got hot enough for the steel to fail because of the fire. I am trying very hard trying to find evidence to support the official theory, but I'm still searching. Here is some testing done in Project 3 headed up by Frank Gayle of NIST. However, as I look through some of this, I don't see any evidence that the steel got anywhere near the required temperatures for failure. I think 1150 degrees farenheit is listed as a temperature that steel would be at half strength. I'm not sure I agree with that number since this is high strength steel, but even if we use that number, there are no signs of it in the paint deformation tests conducted. Can somebody find any evidence? If you scroll down to the 6th page it says that most perimeter panels( 157 of 160 locations mapped) saw no temperature greater than 250 degrees Celsius or 482 degrees farenheit despite precollapse exposure to fire on 13 panels. They mentioned that no spheroidization was observed on 136 samples, and thus no temperatures over 625 Celsius. I can't see how this fire making the steel fail story is possible.

 

NIST TESTS for Steel Temperatures

 

Actually to believe the official story you have to believe that the combined effect of the fire plus the weakened building due to gaping holes caused by the airplanes caused the pancake effect.

 

But then again, when have you ever let facts get in the way of one of your foolish rants on here.

[GridIronAssassin#1 0]

 

at the very end Rosie talks about the building 7 collapse

 

There are fringelike personalities on just about every issue, for and against. The point is, there are no steel samples of the 236 that NIST collected that show high enough temperatures for the steel to fail. If there are, show them. I'd love to see any evidence. Without evidence, the official story doesn't have a leg to stand on. Tests Nist conducted for steel temperature

[GridIronAssassin#1 0]

Actually to believe the official story you have to believe that the combined effect of the fire plus the weakened building due to gaping holes caused by the airplanes caused the pancake effect.

 

But then again, when have you ever let facts get in the way of one of your foolish rants on here.

 

Do you even understand the issue? The jet impact only served as a device to start the fire and according to NIST and to take off the insulation off the steel. The actual impact only severed 6 and 10 core columns according to NIST and a few perimeter columns. That means a 2nd event had to take down the rest of the building. Without a second event, the towers, according to NIST would still be standing. NIST claims fire did it , but there is no evidence that fire could reach the necessary temperatures to knock down the columns. Unless you see something that I am missing. You need to show that the temperatures got hot enough make the steel fail, or your story is false.

 

Try reading this==>>These are temperatures reported by NIST........

 

You can scroll down through all 15 pages of Gayle's work here and not find any evidence that the steel had high enought temperatures to make the steel fail.

 

Shonuff, Nist is saying it was 2 events that did it. Nist recognizes, that jet impact couldn't do it alone. The fires are the 2nd event they say made the steel fail. That's what is being questioned. The fires as far as I can see didn't reach temperatures that could do the damage.

 

You tinfoil heads really need to make a decision. Either President Bush is the biggest bumbling, rambling, incoherent, self righteous baffoon that you have all continued to say he is or he is the greatest mind in the world to be able to pull off a conspiracy like this. Seriously, make up your mind already. You can't have it both ways. The guy can't even get somebody fired or send a memo without it being leaked to the press but for some reason you now think this government can keep a secret of this magnitude and have not one person come forward and admit the plan? Please.

 

Instead of figuring out Bush's role in this, why not try to defend your story on how fire makes steel fail. Show me some evidence that steel samples achieved necessary temperatures to make the steel fail. Unless you can prove that temperatures of the steel were hot enough to make those columns fail, you are the one with the tinfoil hat.

 

Please read ==>> NIST TESTS

[VikesFan 1]

That's what I was questioning. I didn't know if anyone had any ideas what that sound was. The 2nd plane seems like a possible candidate of choice.

 

However to believe in the official report, one has to believe that steel temperatures got hot enough for the steel to fail because of the fire. I am trying very hard trying to find evidence to support the official theory, but I'm still searching. Here is some testing done in Project 3 headed up by Frank Gayle of NIST. However, as I look through some of this, I don't see any evidence that the steel got anywhere near the required temperatures for failure. I think 1150 degrees farenheit is listed as a temperature that steel would be at half strength. I'm not sure I agree with that number since this is high strength steel, but even if we use that number, there are no signs of it in the paint deformation tests conducted. Can somebody find any evidence? If you scroll down to the 6th page it says that most perimeter panels( 157 of 160 locations mapped) saw no temperature greater than 250 degrees Celsius or 482 degrees farenheit despite precollapse exposure to fire on 13 panels. They mentioned that no spheroidization was observed on 136 samples, and thus no temperatures over 625 Celsius. I can't see how this fire making the steel fail story is possible.

 

NIST TESTS for Steel Temperatures

 

 

Here's some more food for thought:

 

In order for the towers to fall the way they fell, all supports would have had to collapse nearly simultaneously. Kind of hard to do as the fires will heat things unevenly...

 

Oh, the columns would have to break at opposite angles in multiple locations as well.

 

Otherwise, the building would collapse into it's weekest point and likely either fall over like a tree or remain partially standing with a ton of debris below.

[p.man 7]

I didn't read the tests yet, but I'm sure they would need a lot of fuel to make a big enough blast to do a lot of damage. The Towers falling would attest to enough damage.

 

The hijacked planes that were bound for California had more fuel on board.

More fuel, more heat, bigger blast, lot's of damage.

[Boz/BoFan 0]

Do you even understand the issue? The jet impact only served as a device to start the fire and according to NIST and to take off the insulation off the steel. The actual impact only severed 6 and 10 core columns according to NIST and a few perimeter columns. That means a 2nd event had to take down the rest of the building. Without a second event, the towers, according to NIST would still be standing. NIST claims fire did it , but there is no evidence that fire could reach the necessary temperatures to knock down the columns. Unless you see something that I am missing. You need to show that the temperatures got hot enough make the steel fail, or your story is false.

 

Try reading this==>>These are temperatures reported by NIST........

 

You can scroll down through all 15 pages of Gayle's work here and not find any evidence that the steel had high enought temperatures to make the steel fail.

 

Shonuff, Nist is saying it was 2 events that did it. Nist recognizes, that jet impact couldn't do it alone. The fires are the 2nd event they say made the steel fail. That's what is being questioned. The fires as far as I can see didn't reach temperatures that could do the damage.

Instead of figuring out Bush's role in this, why not try to defend your story on how fire makes steel fail. Show me some evidence that steel samples achieved necessary temperatures to make the steel fail. Unless you can prove that temperatures of the steel were hot enough to make those columns fail, you are the one with the tinfoil hat.

 

Please read ==>> NIST TESTS

 

 

We've successfully destroyed every single one of your claims and you keep coming back. You do understand that the nature of a conspiracy theorist will never allow fact or logic to override his conspiracy? You are, and forever will be stuck in the "911 was an inside job" state for the rest of your life. Its the saddest thing ive ever come across in my entire life.

 

Do you realize anything qualifies for a conspiracy? If I cared to, I could put together a nice little package about how the Hoover dam was created specifically as a soviet monitoring station, complete with "scientific" analysis, interviews, video etc etc.

 

You're just another nut job, like Rosie O'fatfuck.

[Stumpnov 0]

This guy has a pretty good theory on the subject

[jets24 6]

Do you even understand the issue? The jet impact only served as a device to start the fire and according to NIST and to take off the insulation off the steel. The actual impact only severed 6 and 10 core columns according to NIST and a few perimeter columns. That means a 2nd event had to take down the rest of the building. Without a second event, the towers, according to NIST would still be standing. NIST claims fire did it , but there is no evidence that fire could reach the necessary temperatures to knock down the columns. Unless you see something that I am missing. You need to show that the temperatures got hot enough make the steel fail, or your story is false.

 

Try reading this==>>These are temperatures reported by NIST........

 

You can scroll down through all 15 pages of Gayle's work here and not find any evidence that the steel had high enought temperatures to make the steel fail.

 

Shonuff, Nist is saying it was 2 events that did it. Nist recognizes, that jet impact couldn't do it alone. The fires are the 2nd event they say made the steel fail. That's what is being questioned. The fires as far as I can see didn't reach temperatures that could do the damage.

Instead of figuring out Bush's role in this, why not try to defend your story on how fire makes steel fail. Show me some evidence that steel samples achieved necessary temperatures to make the steel fail. Unless you can prove that temperatures of the steel were hot enough to make those columns fail, you are the one with the tinfoil hat.

 

Please read ==>> NIST TESTS

 

 

Pay close attention Chicken Little. The fact that you say sentences like "why not try to defend your story on how fire makes steel fail" when I never even spoke of fire, steel or had a story should tell you that you are in need of some serious psychiatric help. It's gonna be ok. I promise. Just take it easy. Nobody is gonna hurt you.

[IndyTom 0]

 

What's exploding? Is this one of the planes?

 

Finally. Someone who believe that Bush spent the first 9 months of his presidency planning the 9/11 attacks - lining up 1000's of people, including terrorists, the FAA, the Pentagon, the CIA, and NSA. Fortunately, while Governor of Texas, he had the foresight to ask the terrorists to enter our country 6 years in advance, learn to fly jumbo jets, in the event he would run, and win, the presidency. The fact that every single person has been able to keep quiet, and the fact that no Democrats who absolutely hate his guts agreed to stay quiet as well is beyond brilliance.

 

Keep these links coming!

[jets24 6]

Finally. Someone who believe that Bush spent the first 9 months of his presidency planning the 9/11 attacks - lining up 1000's of people, including terrorists, the FAA, the Pentagon, the CIA, and NSA. Fortunately, while Governor of Texas, he had the foresight to ask the terrorists to enter our country 6 years in advance, learn to fly jumbo jets, in the event he would run, and win, the presidency. The fact that every single person has been able to keep quiet, and the fact that no Democrats who absolutely hate his guts agreed to stay quiet as well is beyond brilliance.

 

Keep these links coming!

 

 

But the fire and the steel! It had to be a conspiracy!

[gocolts 300]

This guy has a pretty good theory on the subject

 

That 20 dollar bill fold thing is focking scary. Being designed 42 years before the Twin Towers were built, yet they put that in there. I guess they have planning this for 50 years.......or more

[gocolts 300]

This guy has a pretty good theory on the subject

 

That 20 dollar bill fold thing is focking scary. Being designed 42 years before the Twin Towers were built, yet they put that in there. I guess they have planning this for 50 years.......or more

[jets24 6]

 

That 20 dollar bill fold thing is focking scary. Being designed 42 years before the Twin Towers were built, yet they put that in there. I guess they have planning this for 50 years.......or more

 

 

It was funny once.

 

 

 

alsojustkiddingitwasfunnybothtimes

 

like the fact that steel melts at 1525° C, and although jet fuel burns only at 825° C, it doesn't have to burn hot enough to melt to cause the buildings to collapse, since steel loses 50% of its strength at 648 ° C), check out the following links: What will Grid Iron say?

[gocolts 300]

It was funny once.

alsojustkiddingitwasfunnybothtimes

I only posted it once my browser crashed and I came back and it was there 2 times

 

 

something weird happening here

 

:tinfoilhat:

[jets24 6]

I only posted it once my browser crashed and I came back and it was there 2 times

something weird happening here

 

:tinfoilhat:

 

 

THEY'RE WATCHING

[Cyber Gandalf 0]

Actually to believe the official story you have to believe that the combined effect of the fire plus the weakened building due to gaping holes caused by the airplanes caused the pancake effect.

 

But then again, when have you ever let facts get in the way of one of your foolish rants on here.

 

A building never collapsed from fire...some of the firefighters said they heard sounds of bombs going off.

[GridIronAssassin#1 0]

Here's some more food for thought:

 

In order for the towers to fall the way they fell, all supports would have had to collapse nearly simultaneously. Kind of hard to do as the fires will heat things unevenly...

 

Oh, the columns would have to break at opposite angles in multiple locations as well.

 

Otherwise, the building would collapse into it's weekest point and likely either fall over like a tree or remain partially standing with a ton of debris below.

 

Yes, agreed. Assymetrical fires means you'd have an assymetrical collapse. Of course 911 myths and others say that building 7 fell diagonally even though we saw it fall straight down. Yes, the simultaneous collapse of all columns doesn't work real well unless the fire was burning in the same spots the whole time. But scientific reasoning won't get in the way of some of these goofs.