INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

What is the truth behind 9/11?

...on serious topics that don't fit anywhere else at present.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#101 Post by Lifelinking » August 29th, 2009, 7:54 pm

Latest post of the previous page:

Is that the limit of your imagination? You can't even free your mind enough to imagine things that someone else hasn't...how sad. A mind that cannot even imagine something new...tch tch tch
I had not expected you to resort to personal slurs during a discussion Nirvanam. Getreal's post was quite clearly light hearted. Do you think your response was appropriate?
"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 9307
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#102 Post by Maria Mac » August 29th, 2009, 8:17 pm

Lifelinking wrote:
Is that the limit of your imagination? You can't even free your mind enough to imagine things that someone else hasn't...how sad. A mind that cannot even imagine something new...tch tch tch
I had not expected you to resort to personal slurs during a discussion Nirvanam. Getreal's post was quite clearly light hearted. Do you think your response was appropriate?
Hear, hear. Lighten up, Nirvanam.

Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#103 Post by Nirvanam » August 29th, 2009, 8:44 pm

Nirvanam wrote:
getreal wrote:So. Not shape shifting lizards then?

Bugger!
Is that the limit of your imagination? You can't even free your mind enough to imagine things that someone else hasn't...how sad. A mind that cannot even imagine something new...tch tch tch
Getreal, my sincere apologies to you...just got caught in the moment. No excuses.

Life, Maria, Alan, thanks for your messages and thanks for letting me know that you held me in a much higher regard than I demonstrated. I am as human as you guys and vulnerable to such knee jerk reactions. Thanks again for helping me see my stupidity immediately :D

Maria Mac
Site Admin
Posts: 9307
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:34 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#104 Post by Maria Mac » August 29th, 2009, 9:41 pm

Nice one, Nirvanam. :thumbsup:

User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#105 Post by Lifelinking » August 30th, 2009, 10:15 am

Nirvanam, from all the stuff you posted here on TH I sense that you are very decent person, hence the surprise I spoke of earlier and my complete lack of surprise at your eloquent apology. :D
"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

tubataxidriver
Posts: 375
Joined: August 3rd, 2007, 10:39 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#106 Post by tubataxidriver » August 30th, 2009, 1:16 pm

Nirvanam wrote:If it was fire related, then why aren't the organizations that certified those steel frames (was it UL?) not under trial for certifying them wrongly?
Just to close this point off, I would expect that many aspects of the design and make-up of the buildings were certified by a variety of bodies against particular scenarios as set out in test standards. The problem is that the standard fire growth temperature curve used for these certifications will have assumed a limited scale fire (just a few building elements, with limited ventilation) which was not the case here, a fire fuelled by building contents only (in this case we had the jet fuel and also the building's contents), with fire compartmentation intact (this was breached by the impact over several flooors) and passive fire protection intact (this would have been loosened if not removed in the impact). Sprinkler systems are supposed to limit the scale of growth of any fire - this did not happen - so the fire grew to whole floor scale on several floors. In summary, the fire was much worse than the designers and the fire codes had anticipated, even allowing for the safety factors applied. This would have made collapse inevitable after a certain amount of time. The fact that both towers behaved similarly supports this.

The collapse process turned a static situation into a dynamic one. Under normal circumstances one might hope that the weight of a collapsing floor would be held by the floor below, which is not subjected to fire (this was the case at the Broadgate fire in London, and other similar fires). In the 9/11 case perhaps 10 floors were involved in the fire, so the weakened steelwork of the floor below would not have held up the impact. Past the first collapsing floor, the kinetic energy gained (remember the weight of the non-burning floors above the impact area) would be sufficient to overcome the strength of the connections between the steelwork sections and the whole thing comes down. Remember we had a similar behaviour at the Ronan Point collapse, where a small gas explosion on a high floor was sufficient to break a few connections, but the kinetic energy of the collapsing floors was sufficient to take the collapse most of the way down the building.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#107 Post by Alan H » August 30th, 2009, 1:51 pm

Good point TTD. If the aircraft had impacted the very top of the tower, it may not have collapsed. However, because there were intact floors above the impact floor(s), their weight collapsed onto the impact floors when the structure of those floors was compromised by the impact.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#108 Post by Nirvanam » August 30th, 2009, 2:57 pm

tubataxidriver wrote:Past the first collapsing floor, the kinetic energy gained (remember the weight of the non-burning floors above the impact area) would be sufficient to overcome the strength of the connections between the steelwork sections and the whole thing comes down.
Have they shown this to be true through any equations / models? If so, has it been peer reviewed and accepted? Or is it an assumption that these scientists are working on.

Apart from buildings 1 and 2, what happened to 7? No mention of it in any reports of the government...this one too had come down almost in free fall speed. And if you remember the BBC newsreader, when she was reading out that WTC 7 had COLLAPSED, you could see the building standing through the window behind her. It went down only after around 10 minutes.

My larger point is this: the government told us that 9/11 incident had been perpetrated by 19 hijackers (a few of them apparently turned out alive). None of us know whether this is true. We don't even know if the government itself conspired. There is no credible evidence provided by the government for going after those 19 terrorists and OBL. Also, the government has not scientifically proven how exactly things unfolded. If they come out and say, "guys the thing is that we are not competent enough to know the physics of it, but we will work it out in time", that would be more appreciated than the government claiming to KNOW the exact sequence of things...because this is where their explanations are being debunked.

Does this mean government did 9/11, I don't know. But did the government use the 9/11 incident to further its objectives by whipping up mass hysteria? You bet they did, and are continuing to do it.

For every truther, you will find one debunker. The question is, who benefits from all this? Or rather who IS benefiting from all this?

User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#109 Post by Lifelinking » August 30th, 2009, 3:15 pm

But did the government use the 9/11 incident to further its objectives by whipping up mass hysteria? You bet they did, and are continuing to do it.
Politicians exploiting a situation to the advantage of powerful elites? I would be surprised if it did not happen. I think they must love the conspiracy stuff, as it distracts beautifully from the real inequalities, inequities and iniquities that are happening all around us.
"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#110 Post by Alan H » August 30th, 2009, 3:37 pm

Nirvanam wrote:Have they shown this to be true through any equations / models? If so, has it been peer reviewed and accepted? Or is it an assumption that these scientists are working on.
Has what you're suggesting been peer reviewed, particcularly by anyone who has some expertise and knowledge of buildings and mechanics? Or is it just what someone on the Internet has come up with to bolster his assumptions?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#111 Post by Alan H » August 30th, 2009, 3:39 pm

Nirvanam wrote:...because this is where their explanations are being debunked.
I've not seen any credible debunking yet.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#112 Post by Alan H » August 31st, 2009, 5:48 pm

Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#113 Post by Lifelinking » August 31st, 2009, 10:59 pm

:laughter:
"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

Dan
Posts: 298
Joined: November 26th, 2007, 5:05 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#114 Post by Dan » September 2nd, 2009, 12:02 pm

This kind of thing is never ending. Must those who think that the broad thrust of the "official" account of the collapse of the world trade towers is correct deal with every imagined "objection" by experiment? No.

Does the objection to US foreign policy after 9/11 hinge on whether or not al-qaeda was involved in the attack? No. In other words, even if al-qaeda was involved, and even if the World trade towers did collapse as per the official story, that doesn't mean we are required to support the US response or US imperialism in general.

In fact, this line of argument is a fallacious ad hominem-type argument.

I'm sure that al-qaeda was involved with 9/11. I think the attacks were committed by a fairly small group of al-qaeda inspired Islamic militants, who hijacked the planes and flew them themselves. I'm also sure that whather the US authorities had picked up about possible plots, they did not attack the World Trade Centre themselves, did not deliberately allow the attack to happen in full knowledge of what was involved, and did not blow up the various targets themselves in order to make it look like they were attacked.

But I do not support US foreign policy.

There may always be aspects of 9/11 that are never known for certain, or that remain ambiguous. Some of the details may remain apparently contradictory.

The "conspiracy" stuff about how the buildings collapsed is nonsense. Various other buildings are compared with the World Trade Center, as though all tall buildings were the same. But all tall buildings are not the same, and you will notice that never are the structures of the buildings compared. Which of those cited had exactly the same steel structure as the World Trade Center?

Also, which other buildings had a plane flown into them? That seems to be an important fact which is ignored by Nirvanam. Important because of the effect of that on the building structure: for example, the plane impact destroyed the fireproofing that might otherwise have allowed the buildings to stand longer. Would that not be an important factor?

Most of the "conspiratorial" chatter is desperate rubbish, and often an exercise of deliberate mystification and disinformation.

Dan

User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#115 Post by Lifelinking » September 2nd, 2009, 12:30 pm

I am in broad agreement with all of the above,



L
"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

User avatar
gcb01
Posts: 564
Joined: July 8th, 2007, 1:50 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#116 Post by gcb01 » September 2nd, 2009, 1:06 pm

Dan wrote:Also, which other buildings had a plane flown into them?
The Empire State Building was hit by a B-25 bomber in 1945 in thick fog.
Dan wrote:Also, which other buildings had a plane flown into them? That seems to be an important fact which is ignored by Nirvanam. Important because of the effect of that on the building structure: for example, the plane impact destroyed the fireproofing that might otherwise have allowed the buildings to stand longer. Would that not be an important factor?
Dan
I recall reading that the architect of the twin towers had designed them to cope with an aircraft such as the Boeing 707 - the largest around when the towers were built. The aircraft which flew into the towers were considerably bigger and heavier.

I think the key was the weight of the planes versus the design of the towers and that they had a heavy fuel load (having just taken off for flights to the West coast). The damage inflected to the fire-proofing combined with the amount of fuel allowed the steel to be heated to a temperature where it started to lose its strength.
Regards

Campbell

Dan
Posts: 298
Joined: November 26th, 2007, 5:05 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#117 Post by Dan » September 2nd, 2009, 2:22 pm

gcb01 wrote:
Dan wrote:Also, which other buildings had a plane flown into them?
The Empire State Building was hit by a B-25 bomber in 1945 in thick fog.
Oh yes, I'd forgotten about that.

Much smaller plane, of course:

B-52:

Length: 52 ft 11 in (16.1 m)
Wingspan: 67 ft 6 in (20.6 m)

Boeing 767:

Length 159 ft 2 in (48.5 m)
Wingspan 156 ft 1 in (47.6 m)

And note that the fires were fought. And that it is a steel and concrete design, quite unlike the WTC.

Dan

User avatar
Lifelinking
Posts: 3248
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 11:56 am

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#118 Post by Lifelinking » September 2nd, 2009, 3:52 pm

"Who thinks the law has anything to do with justice? It's what we have because we can't have justice."
William McIlvanney

User avatar
getreal
Posts: 4354
Joined: November 20th, 2008, 5:40 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#119 Post by getreal » September 2nd, 2009, 7:11 pm

Just barely on topic, but plane crashes and conspiracy theories seem to go together like....

well, plane crashes and conspiracy theories, I suppose.
"It's hard to put a leash on a dog once you've put a crown on his head"-Tyrion Lannister.

User avatar
getreal
Posts: 4354
Joined: November 20th, 2008, 5:40 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#120 Post by getreal » September 7th, 2009, 11:10 pm

Just watched "102 Minutes That Changed America" on Channel 4. Don't know if anyone else saw it.

They used footage they claimed hadn't been seen before-I had certainly not seen most of it before.
There was no commentry as such, just what the people involved were saying. I thought it portrayed the disbelief and confusion more than any other 9/11 documentry I have watched.

Some of the footage was painful to watch.
Some of the dialoge was uncomfortable to hear.

I found the whole thing quite sobering.
"It's hard to put a leash on a dog once you've put a crown on his head"-Tyrion Lannister.

Nirvanam
Posts: 1023
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 11:29 pm

Re: What is the truth behind 9/11?

#121 Post by Nirvanam » September 8th, 2009, 3:55 pm

getreal wrote:Just watched "102 Minutes That Changed America" on Channel 4. Don't know if anyone else saw it.

They used footage they claimed hadn't been seen before-I had certainly not seen most of it before.
There was no commentry as such, just what the people involved were saying. I thought it portrayed the disbelief and confusion more than any other 9/11 documentry I have watched.

Some of the footage was painful to watch.
Some of the dialoge was uncomfortable to hear.

I found the whole thing quite sobering.
There was one made on the 26/11 Mumbai incident as well...very well made. It was called "Dispatches" or something like that...not able to locate the video link.

When Kasab (the guy who was caught) was in the hospital and the police were questioning him, it was like the guy didn't even know what he did....neither sad nor happy...he was narrating things like as if it was any regular day. How do they manage to brainwash them like that?

And the worst part was when the controllers on the telephone instructing the attackers that "for each jew you kill, it is equal to n number of regular infidels and allah will give you that much more credit"...wow!

Post Reply