Your thoughts

[Gaeios(Graxlos)]

this post sucks it is spamming the recent posts and it lost any validity a few days ago.

This is a post about beliefs not about science.

Some believe that some terrorists did something quite extraordinary and achieved something very unlikely.

Some believe that powerful men with hidden agendas did this to achieve unknown purposes.

We will most likely never know who is right.

Stop replying.

[legintown]

If you want to know why, then just look at what has happened since. Who has made money from it? The entire industrial military complex has reaped IMMENSE profits from this. USA is finally able to control 2 countries in the middle east. The IMF and the federal reserve has secured depts for a lifetime. People within the governemt, and their former associates are either directors or part owners of these companies. And last but not least, the Bush administration has passed legislations that are totally unconstitutional and in direct violation of the bill of rights, making USA a police state, and giving the president dictatorial powers, all in the name of national security. Where did the EXACT same thing happen...oh yeah I can't mention that, cuz that makes me a cook and this thread will die. And I guess people like George Orwell was a cook too...

To answer delling and Cwave: In that report Cwave posted, its first of all a government agency, so credibility level goes to the bottom. Also, the report lacks information. Quote:
the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius

They dont say how the temperatures reach 1000 degrees, and how could they even know? They make no proof of how. And suggesting jet fuel is just not an option, since the open-air burning temperature of jet fuel only burns at about 250-320 degrees celcius. It has to be oxydated to reach maximum temperatures.
Concerning the diesel oil again, diesel oil hardly burns if it is not vapourised. I know this for a fact since i work with diesel engines. If the injector does vapourise the oil good enough, the engine will hardly even run. So saying that tanks of diesel oil exploded, is something i find very curious. Plus, the burning open air burning temperature of diesel oil is very low.

Also, please explain what we see on the followin pictures from the base cloumns:

http://piratenews.org/thermite-thermate-wtc-steel400.jpg

I searched for some time but couldnt find the other picture where you also clearly see that a row of the base cloumns has been cut.

Anyway, we are focuseing too much on one subject. No1 has come up with a plausible theory for WTC 7, or all of the totally bizarre claims about Pentagon

[Cwave]

Ill keep doing bits and pieces so you dont get overwhelmed...
Stop saying random p00p like

In that report Cwave posted, its first of all a government agency, so credibility level goes to the bottom.

Why? Give me information, Why is it that because its from the goverment, its false? Or wait, ARE YOU BIASED MAYBE OLOLOL?

Also, the report lacks information.

What information? What is missing?

They dont say how the temperatures reach 1000 degrees, and how could they even know? They make no proof of how. And suggesting jet fuel is just not an option, since the open-air burning temperature of jet fuel only burns at about 250-320 degrees celcius.

Shell Jet A-1 refueller truck on the ramp at Vancouver International Airport (notice the 1863 Hazardous Material placard and "JET A-1" stickers)Jet A is the standard jet fuel type in the U.S. since the 1950s and is only available there. JET A is similar to JET-A1, except for its higher freezing point of -40° C (vs -47° C JET A-1). Like JET A-1, JET A has a fairly high flash point of 38° C, with an autoignition temperature of 410° F (210° C).

You think an airliner colliding with a tower can cause an explosion that reached 410 degrees? Or are there no videos of airplanes exploding into the WTC?
Plus, a WTC skyscraper is NOT open air and with it being at the 100th floor there is more then enough wind blowing into the fire to reach high temps!! Or do the clouds of the fire go straight up hinting at zero wind that day? No they dont, or did the ninja goverment Sony Vegas that in?

Foto of the 1st planes inc to the WTC:

               __       ____
                \ \      \      \
                 \ \____\___\__
                  \_LMAOplane__\
                             \     \
                              \___\

[Tyler]

Posting in a retared thread!

I thought this one might die down, but no... So here are my two cents for what its worth.

The US government are far too stupid to conceive and execute a plan to massacre 3000 of their own citizens to get more funding for the military. George Bush can barely tie his own shoes.

The chance of someone involved in the conspiracy, and something of this scale would have many people involved, leaking the information is just far too high for anyone to take the risk. Even if they were insane enough to want to do it. They person who broke that story would become the most famous person in the world.

As for the science, I remember reading and watching lots of stuff in The Guardian/BBC/New Scientist magazine that convinced me thoroughly enough that that amount of aviation fuel, combined with a flaw in the design of the towers, contained enough energy to do the damage. I trust those news organisations more than a few random web pages. Scientists love proving each other wrong even more than internet forum users, their careers depend on it, so again the incentive for the truth to come out is there.

People love conspiracy theories, there are a similar set about the moon landings. The moon landing ones are amazingly easy to disprove however cos so many scientist have analysed the rocks the astronauts brought back, and those rocks can only have come from the moon. The thing to remember is how hard it would be to set up these conspiracies with no one finding out. For the moon landing one it is definitely much much easier to send a rocket to the moon and back than try and fool 6 billion people.

Everyone is a little bit paranoid, it’s the human condition! Our brains are so good at recognising patterns that we often see ones that aren't there, look at the master looter discussions we have nearly every damn raid.


So in the end I'll go with the standard 9/11 expatiation:

Large numbers of people in world are pissed off that 1/3 of the worlds population live on less than $1 per day while people in the west sit in air-conditioned luxury. For these people America, and especially the world trade centre, are symbols of the capitalist system that produces this inequality.

Some of these people attach their outrage to fundamentalist religion. A very tiny minority of those get promised a good spot in heaven then strap on the explosives.

The first time they tried to blow up the trade centre, when Clinton was in charge, the bombs in the basement failed miserably. Bin Laden and chums then came up with the jumbo jet plan, which did the trick. His actions continue to cost the west billions each year from the restrictions on travel.

[legintown]

Ill keep doing bits and pieces so you dont get overwhelmed...
Stop saying random p00p like

In that report Cwave posted, its first of all a government agency, so credibility level goes to the bottom.

Why? Give me information, Why is it that because its from the goverment, its false? Or wait, ARE YOU BIASED MAYBE OLOLOL?
 
You think an airliner colliding with a tower can cause an explosion that reached 410 degrees? Or are there no videos of airplanes exploding into the WTC?
Plus, a WTC skyscraper is NOT open air and with it being at the 100th floor there is more then enough wind blowing into the fire to reach high temps!! Or do the clouds of the fire go straight up hinting at zero wind that day? No they dont, or did the ninja goverment Sony Vegas that in?

First: I lol'ed. Second: Yes. It will ignite on impact because of the sparks that always will come with pieces of metal hit each other at high speeds, and sparks are kinda hot. They are even used to ignite fuel in cars. You can also clearly see in the footage that a huge firball explodes, where most of the fuel is instanly burned, unless ofc the passenger luggage was highly flammable!
And for the wind blowing in to make the fuel reach max temperature is LAUGHABLE! Seriosuly, laughable. First of all, oxygen levels decrease with altitude, yet at this altitude it isn't an important factor. Second of all, the oxygen levels of normal air is much much lower than what is needed for open fire to burn at maximum temperature. Again, I know this because I work with engines, where you need to compress the air to match the level of fuel. This is basic fuel/air mixture science.

[Cwave]

Someone pointed out that you have named this thread "Your Thoughts" yet all you do is spill your own biased believe and say stfu to anyone was doesnt agree or catches you on a lie. You have dug in way to deep and refuse to debate like a normal person.
Just because you fiddle with engines due to your racing background does not! make you a jetlinerturbine engine specialist.
Well in the real world it doesnt, but on the internets, its whoever says stfu the most to the disagree-ing party right?

They're watching you......!

[Starbrow]

As Cwave pointed out, it appears that you have just crumbled up into your own little ball of biased views, and is now merely spewing random goo at the rest of the people in this thread who happen to not agree completely with you.

I do think for myself. I do care about the world. I do not need you to do that for me.

You asked for our thoughts, we gave them to you, and in return you pay us kindly with flames, insults and suggestions to shut the fuck up. Can you not even remotely imagine why we're sort of annoyed by this?

While this discussion is a funny read, I do believe you're making a complete and utter tit of yourself, whilst demonstrating that you are completely incapable of open debate and discussion. But then again, that's just my opinion, which you will now go and "falsify" by linking some random video/website/report.

[Bombardi]

my thoughts about 9/11...

first thing i thought about was who did it!
second thing was how many injured people and deaths...

enuf postfarming for now

[legintown]

Well I strike back at claims that are incorrect. If some1 insisted that the color red was actually white, and you said no, its red, but the person kept telling you that it is white, even though you know for a fact, that it is red, wouldnt you start to think omg?

If some1 can for example post me an experiment made with lets say jet fuel on steel, and it proves that the chemical reaction of burnt fuel does some chemical reaction to the steel etc, I'd say hey that sound interesting, but claiming that fuel and diesel oil burn at temperatures high enough to melt certified steel is just plain stupid. This is a debate, nothing personal. Its about(or has turned to) a debate on science.

[Cwave]

Noone said we need to melt steel
Again you misquote.
You can heat it to 600 and it will loose 50% of its supporting strength

[legintown]

Where did you get that number from anyway, 600 degrees. Got any document or experiment to support it?

Found this funny picture btw ^^ http://www.wayodd.com/funny-pictures2/funny-pictures-cannabis-legalized-in-new-york-0Qe.jpg

[Cwave]

From university of Manchester
Or are they evil too?

Hot finished carbon steel begins to lose strength at temperatures above 300°C and reduces in strength at steady rate up to 800°C. The small residual strength then reduces more gradually until the melting temperature at around 1500°C. This behaviour is similar for hot rolled reinforcing steels. For cold worked steels including reinforcement, there is a more rapid decrease of strength after 300°C (Lawson & Newman 1990). In addition to the reduction of material strength and stiffness, steel displays a significant creep phenomena at temperatures over 450°C. The phenomena of creep results in an increase of deformation (strain) with time, even if the temperature and applied stress remain unchanged

http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/materialInFire/Steel/default.htm

[legintown]

Very true, steel does loose its strength at high temperatures. What we need to specify more, is how much strength it looses in % at various temperatures. This however, brings us back to the same things we started with: Was there any circumstances for the steel to reach these temperatures? How many core columns were knocked out, and would it be enough or not enough to hold the building up? And last, the fashion it collapsed(straight fall down, no topling at all).

[kawe]

WTS [Tin Foil Hat]

[Auran]

I agree with Cwave. Numerology, conspiracy... our mind has the ingenuinity to complicate a lot of things. Sometimes it's really comforting to take things as they are presented and be satisfied with that. Ergo... the 72 virgin-story. Manipulation of the mind is a powerful tool and an evil mind capable of doing such a thing to a human might as well be capable of devicing some idiotic plan that turns the world up side down, even getting everyone that far to even think that the victimized country could be the cause itself.