• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

9/11[w:236]

re: 9/11[W:236]

Menard_K said:
Hot spots that are indicated as being hotter than the melting point of steel
are VERY interesting and clearly indicate that something is VERY wrong with
the official story of what happened ( or was alleged to have happened ..... )
Click to expand...

"The presence of molten metals is not an indication of planned demolition work. Explosives do not produce pools of molten metal, and incendiaries like thermite burn themselves out in seconds even in the absence of oxygen and would not be available for weeks as fuel. "

"A long-lasting source of fuel was available within the well-insulated piles: the contents of the buildings. According to a study by the U.C. Davis DELTA team, the tower collapses, as destructive as they were, expended less than 1% of the potential chemical energy that was stored in building contents, oil spills, and automobiles in the WTC parking garages. "

Cahill's research indicates there was enough energy from the types of debris in the pile to produce the temps you seem concerned about. Care to refute Cahill's findings?

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/canofficefirescauselargesteelcolumnsandb
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

mike2810 said:
"The presence of molten metals is not an indication of planned demolition work. Explosives do not produce pools of molten metal, and incendiaries like thermite burn themselves out in seconds even in the absence of oxygen and would not be available for weeks as fuel. "

"A long-lasting source of fuel was available within the well-insulated piles: the contents of the buildings. According to a study by the U.C. Davis DELTA team, the tower collapses, as destructive as they were, expended less than 1% of the potential chemical energy that was stored in building contents, oil spills, and automobiles in the WTC parking garages. "

Cahill's research indicates there was enough energy from the types of debris in the pile to produce the temps you seem concerned about. Care to refute Cahill's findings?

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/canofficefirescauselargesteelcolumnsandb
Click to expand...

so on the one hand, the pools of molten metal don't exist
but the temperatures that clearly indicate molten metal would
exist because of hydrocarbon fires that are only capable of reaching
these temperatures if force-fed oxygen. .... Right ..... got it.
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

Menard_K said:
so on the one hand, the pools of molten metal don't exist
but the temperatures that clearly indicate molten metal would
exist because of hydrocarbon fires that are only capable of reaching
these temperatures if force-fed oxygen. .... Right ..... got it.
Click to expand...

no you didn't get it.
try researching more.
fire temps were hot enough for melting AL.

Let me break it down for you MK
"The presence of molten metals is not an indication of planned demolition work" Do you understand that?
"Explosives do not produce pools of molten metal," Do you follow that statement?
"and incendiaries like thermite burn themselves out in seconds even in the absence of oxygen and would not be available for weeks as fuel. "

So if the hot piles were not produced by the fire. How do you explain them? What explosive/Incendiary chemical was used that would burn for weeks in a oxygen poor environment?

Are you saying Cahill research is wrong?
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

mike2810 said:
no you didn't get it.
try researching more.
fire temps were hot enough for melting AL.

Let me break it down for you MK
"The presence of molten metals is not an indication of planned demolition work" Do you understand that?
"Explosives do not produce pools of molten metal," Do you follow that statement?
"and incendiaries like thermite burn themselves out in seconds even in the absence of oxygen and would not be available for weeks as fuel. "

So if the hot piles were not produced by the fire. How do you explain them? What explosive/Incendiary chemical was used that would burn for weeks in a oxygen poor environment?

Are you saying Cahill research is wrong?
Click to expand...

what I believe ( correct me if I'm wrong here .... ) is you are trying to connect up
the logic that is if molten metal was seen at the site, since Controlled Demolitions do not
produce molten metal, ergo this was NOT a Controlled Demolition.

In the arson investigation dept, if anything is COMPLETELY DESTROYED
it is considered suspicious, now if THREE buildings are COMPLETELY DESTROYED,
and this was said to be a NOT planned for event, that is subject to chaotic forces
and bits that may or may not break right on time in order to achieve the result.
Doesn't this strike you as VERY SUSPICIOUS?

or?
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

Menard_K said:
what I believe ( correct me if I'm wrong here .... ) is you are trying to connect up
the logic that is if molten metal was seen at the site, since Controlled Demolitions do not
produce molten metal, ergo this was NOT a Controlled Demolition.

In the arson investigation dept, if anything is COMPLETELY DESTROYED
it is considered suspicious, now if THREE buildings are COMPLETELY DESTROYED,
and this was said to be a NOT planned for event, that is subject to chaotic forces
and bits that may or may not break right on time in order to achieve the result.
Doesn't this strike you as VERY SUSPICIOUS?

or?
Click to expand...

where is your evidence MK?

MK, get a clue, 911 was a planned event. Just not by who and how you think it was.

You posted that bs before. It was not logical then and it still is not.

What I am saying is good research (Cahill for one) explained the toxic hot piles. Sorry you can't understand that. Just because you can't understand the research does not make it a CD.
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

mike2810 said:
where is your evidence MK?

MK, get a clue, 911 was a planned event. Just not by who and how you think it was.

You posted that bs before. It was not logical then and it still is not.

What I am saying is good research (Cahill for one) explained the toxic hot piles. Sorry you can't understand that. Just because you can't understand the research does not make it a CD.
Click to expand...


The emperor has such a fine new suit
don't you think so ........



have a nice day

: )
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

RogueWarrior said:
Why are the hotspots so important for you?
Click to expand...

I don't understand how office furniture (which met the fire code) burning could turn into a pool of molten iron that remained for 90 days? Do you? I mean what was the furniture made of? Kryptonite? ;)
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

Henry David said:
I don't understand how office furniture (which met the fire code) burning could turn into a pool of molten iron that remained for 90 days? Do you? I mean what was the furniture made of? Kryptonite? ;)
Click to expand...

HD,
Where is your evidence that is was iron? I asked for your source of info. You failed to provide. Why is that, Is it because its all antidotal evidence.
What is so hard to show the rest of us the convincing evidence of 90 days+ of molten iron.

I have seen photos of melted AL that was pulled from the pile. I have yet to find anything that it was iron or steel.
and don't come in with you not good at links. If that is true, help us all you ever flew an aircraft.

"According to a study by the U.C. Davis DELTA team, the tower collapses, as destructive as they were, expended less than 1% of the potential chemical energy that was stored in building contents, oil spills, and automobiles in the WTC parking garages." from one of Cahill's papers.

Are you saying Cahill lied?
 
Last edited:
re: 9/11[W:236]

Absent common sense, a man is woefully blind.
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

Henry David said:
I don't understand how office furniture (which met the fire code) burning could turn into a pool of molten iron that remained for 90 days? Do you? I mean what was the furniture made of? Kryptonite? ;)
Click to expand...
A neat implied false dichotomy.
clap.gif
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

ozeco41 said:
A neat implied false dichotomy.
clap.gif
Click to expand...

Please elaborate "implied false dichotomy" do tell .......
Just exactly what are you trying to say?

Also, if I may stick my oar in ......
What do you make of the fact that if
( & that is a HUGE IF ... )
the fires in the WTC towers were hot enough to weaken steel,
could it be reasonably expected to weaken the steel uniformly.
so as to produce the uniformity of total destruction of the tower(s).?
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

Menard_K said:
Please elaborate "implied false dichotomy" do tell .......
Just exactly what are you trying to say?

Also, if I may stick my oar in ......
What do you make of the fact that if
( & that is a HUGE IF ... )
the fires in the WTC towers were hot enough to weaken steel,
could it be reasonably expected to weaken the steel uniformly.
so as to produce the uniformity of total destruction of the tower(s).?
Click to expand...

"Implied false dichotomy" makes him sound good to the lurkers he imagines are reading his every word. He imagines that there are some people reading here to gather knowledge from an expert, so he couches his replies in that false "Debate Club" format.

All the while offering nothing of substance on the damage done at WTC complex. Dodges direct questions with simple answers, and assumes the Debate Club pseudo format.
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

LowDown said:
I'm more interested in why people would believe that the government was behind the attack on 9-11. It usually comes down to leftist ideology, which has so many problems with reality in general.
Click to expand...

I guess thats what I was trying to get at also. I have seen oil mentioned as a reason but as far as I know we don't controll anything over there. If this was a hoax what happened to all the people that were on the planes? Did they actually kill them? The government pulled all this off and they cant even get a website going???
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

mperry said:
I guess thats what I was trying to get at also. I have seen oil mentioned as a reason but as far as I know we don't controll anything over there. If this was a hoax what happened to all the people that were on the planes? Did they actually kill them? The government pulled all this off and they cant even get a website going???
Click to expand...

The individuals who planned and executed the False Flag of 11 September ARE NOT the same people who are attempting to get the ACA website working, no. Sibelius had nothing at all to do with the events of that day. It was a military operation, with great foreign influence.
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

mperry said:
I guess thats what I was trying to get at also. I have seen oil mentioned as a reason but as far as I know we don't controll anything over there. If this was a hoax what happened to all the people that were on the planes? Did they actually kill them? The government pulled all this off and they cant even get a website going???
Click to expand...

Exactly. It beggars belief to say that they pulled off a job like that without a hitch or a leak or something. The government couldn't even get a 3rd rate burglary right.
 
Last edited:
re: 9/11[W:236]

LowDown said:
Exactly. It beggars belief to say that they pulled off a job like that without a hitch or a leak or something. The government couldn't even get a 3rd rate burglary right.
Click to expand...

Oh there were lots of hitches, but most people are either unaware of them, or have fooled themselves into disregarding the facts.

Prime example: Shanksville.

Even though all the witness testimony, and all the photographic evidence says there was no Boeing there, most folks believe there was a crashed airliner there.

The hitch was that the feds arrived a bit late to the scene, after the honest county coroner Wally Miller had already let the cat out of the bag.
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

Henry David said:
Oh there were lots of hitches, but most people are either unaware of them, or have fooled themselves into disregarding the facts.

Prime example: Shanksville.

Even though all the witness testimony, and all the photographic evidence says there was no Boeing there, most folks believe there was a crashed airliner there.

The hitch was that the feds arrived a bit late to the scene, after the honest county coroner Wally Miller had already let the cat out of the bag.
Click to expand...

Photo evidence and eyewitnesses confirm the plane at Shanksville HD but you refuse to let reality rain on your fantasy.
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

Quag said:
Photo evidence and eyewitnesses confirm the plane at Shanksville HD but you refuse to let reality rain on your fantasy.
Click to expand...

Betcha can't put your money where your mouth is. Betcha can't provide any evidence at all that shows, in context, the presence of 93 at Shanksville. :lol:
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

Henry David said:
Betcha can't put your money where your mouth is. Betcha can't provide any evidence at all that shows, in context, the presence of 93 at Shanksville. :lol:
Click to expand...
Actually if we cut out the arse about logic...

...betcha can't prove it wasn't there.

And that is the correct test. ;)
 
re: 9/11[W:236]

ozeco41 said:
Actually if we cut out the arse about logic...

...betcha can't prove it wasn't there.

And that is the correct test. ;)
Click to expand...

the "correct test" as defined by YOU

Really the problem here is the lack of accounting for "FLT93"
when I've asked what accounting for the mass of "FLT93'
there is, I get pointed to a pix of a dumpster full of bits,
but that could NOT possibly be all that is left of the giant airliner
and also, what checking has been done to see if any serial numbered
parts match up with what was supposed to be part of "FLT93" aircraft?

The whole thing is a FARCE
9/11/2001 = a made for TV drama!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom