Reply With Quote
PH, typical chicken post.
Can't offer any substance, so he wants to close thread.
close this in thread.
its like arguing religion.
PH, typical chicken post.
Can't offer any substance, so he wants to close thread.
we should kill ALL the 9/11 threads, never talk about it again
Stout is selling...(nice post by the way), but I'm still not buying. We aren't taking wooden structures here, as I've already proven, we are talking a building with 57x24 steel beams capable of handling the loss of more than just a few main truss. The lower floors were also reinforced with triangle trusses. Even a house of cards built with toothpicks will offer some resistence to a heavy object thrown on top forcing it to lose momentum and not fall at free fall speed, which can only happen when something offers no resistence at all.
You proved nothing about how much each beam was designed to carry on every floor.as I've already proven, we are talking a building with 57x24 steel beams capable of handling the loss of more than just a few main truss.And if one of them went -- then what? Are you saying they were redundant?The lower floors were also reinforced with triangle trusses.Why do all the conspiacy theorist keep saying it free falls? Is there even a video that shows 7WTC actually hitting the ground?Even a house of cards built with toothpicks will offer some resistence to a heavy object thrown on top forcing it to lose momentum and not fall at free fall speed, which can only happen when something offers no resistence at all.
I didn't have to because the initial NIST and FEMA report both blame the collapse on truss failure on floors lower than 10, much lower.You proved nothing about how much each beam was designed to carry on every floor.
No, but the other beams would still offer resistance, unless they were all somehow compromised.And if one of them went -- then what? Are you saying they were redundant?
So nothing above that could have possibly failed first? Especially since columns could have been knocked out on several floors by the initial debris strike, increasing the load on the remaining columns?
How much? If you have a video of WTC7 hitting the ground, I'd like to see it.
Why does a alternative theory have to be a 'conpiracy theory'? Scientific theory isn't on the side of 'the official story', as a curious lot, doesn't that spark any curiousity?Why do all the conspiacy theorist keep saying it free falls? Is there even a video that shows 7WTC actually hitting the ground?
Free fall and othe laws of motion explained
Because you said there was a conspiracy.Why does a alternative theory have to be a 'conpiracy theory'?
Or are you taking that back now?
Is there a video of a structural engineer explaining it?
what about a government official?
No, I've always said that 911 was The Great Deception, but you won't learn that for a few more decades.
It still hasn't been explained to be by the ALTERNATIVE THEORISTS THAT CONSTANTLY STATE OR IMPLY CONSPIRACY (trying to be sensitive but accurate) why the controlled thermite demolition took seven hours to happen -- just enough time for the fires to look good and cause the building to measurably move after north tower debris had been directed over another building and across the street to knock holes in the southwest corner and south face?
No, you've stated controlled demolition, which is only possible through a conspiracy.
If you think it's a great deception, go ahead and say who you think is doing the deceiving and why.
Hey mookie, did you listen to the interview I linked?
Here's another one since I know you are very interested in the hijackers:
http://www.wnyc.org/shows/lopate/episodes/2005/05/04
typical weak ass two sentence reply. let me praise you for that one. touche
GTFOWTBS
look i don't discredit people who believe that something is fishy about 9/11. I also don't discredit who believe there was no CONSPIRACY. But if you think our government is fine and dandy and there is nothing more to life than clear cut vanilla angel theology... you are kidding yourself.
ask questions, don't have anything forced down your throat.
Last edited by Phil Hellmuth; 04-15-2007 at 11:10 PM.
Go and read post #1 and post #3 of this thread.nbadan has questions. mookie has questions. mouse has questions. i am not as skeptical as these three, but when they ask their questions i'd like for you geniuses to answer them rather than calling them idiots. or else admit that you don't know the answers. .
The starter of this thread asks how can terrorists, who trained on cessnas, fly 757s and 767s into the WTC and the Pentagon.
chump answers by posting extracts from pilots (probably the people most qualified to answer TWF's question) who explain how it is possible for terrorists (or any other group of people who train on cessnas and flight simulators) to fly planes into the Towers.
A question was asked, an answer was given.
Same case as with all other questions asked by mookie, mouse and dan. Answers were provided, but you, and them, could care less because your mind has been set.
Where is a moderator when you need them. Cant all these
threads on 9/11 be consolidated into one thread.
this by the way is the biggest impossibility of 9/11
august 2002
Agency planned exercise on Sept. 11 built around a plane crashing into a building By John J. Lumpkin, Associated Press
WASHINGTON — In what the government describes as a bizarre coincidence, one U.S. intelligence agency was planning an exercise last Sept. 11 in which an errant aircraft would crash into one of its buildings. But the cause wasn't terrorism -- it was to be a simulated accident.
Officials at the Chantilly, Va.-based National Reconnaissance Office had scheduled an exercise that morning in which a small corporate jet would crash into one of the four towers at the agency's headquarters building after experiencing a mechanical failure.
The agency is about four miles from the runways of Washington Dulles International Airport.
Agency chiefs came up with the scenario to test employees' ability to respond to a disaster, said spokesman Art Haubold. No actual plane was to be involved -- to simulate the damage from the crash, some stairwells and exits were to be closed off, forcing employees to find other ways to evacuate the building.
"It was just an incredible coincidence that this happened to involve an aircraft crashing into our facility," Haubold said. "As soon as the real world events began, we canceled the exercise."
Terrorism was to play no role in the exercise, which had been planned for several months, he said.
Adding to the coincidence, American Airlines Flight 77 -- the Boeing 767 that was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon -- took off from Dulles at 8:10 a.m. on Sept. 11, 50 minutes before the exercise was to begin. It struck the Pentagon around 9:40 a.m., killing 64 aboard the plane and 125 on the ground.
The National Reconnaissance Office operates many of the nation's spy satellites. It draws its personnel from the military and the CIA.
After the Sept. 11 attacks, most of the 3,000 people who work at agency headquarters were sent home, save for some essential personnel, Haubold said.
An announcement for an upcoming homeland security conference in Chicago first noted the exercise.
In a promotion for speaker John Fulton, a CIA officer assigned as chief of NRO's strategic gaming division, the announcement says, "On the morning of September 11th 2001, Mr. Fulton and his team ... were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way that day."
The conference is being run by the National Law Enforcement and Security Ins ute.
http://www.boston.com/news/packages/...e_exercise.htm
the chances of this are like 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000
This is also a crazy coincidence.
Released on 9/11/2001:
Also originally scheduled for September 2001 release:
Yep, a conspiracy is only good if one can tie unrelated events into a well knit thread.
I also heard that the power was cut off on the days prior to 9/11. That would only make sense if the perpetrators of the attack (the terrorists with the Government's compliance, or even better, the Governemnt itslef).
, you can make a conspiracy out of anything.
Wasn't a missile who brought down TWA flight 800?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
