For IQ's a little lower...basic information on 9/11....

[I_Gaze_At_The_Blue]

So are you denying the fact that everything was exploded into dust before the buildings even hit the ground? There are countless verified statements from people like the NY Governor etc which I can link if you wish even at the scene saying how they are surprised there is nothing but steel at ground zero...

Nobody is denying that things get turned to dust during collapses ... to think otherwise it moronic, so funny to see how you are trying to twist peoples words to make it seem like that.

Is concrete brittle ???

Is wallboard brittle ???

Were the Towers floor pans lightweight concrete ???

Were the internal walls all gypsum-based ???

So were the Towers full of construction material which can easily turn to dust ???

Wee hint creative ... the answer is yes to all FIVE questions.

Your desperation for however tiny a victory, however phyrric, is most telling !!!

 

[usda select]

Nobody is denying that things get turned to dust during collapses ... to think otherwise it moronic, so funny to see how you are trying to twist peoples words to make it seem like that.

Is concrete brittle ???

Is wallboard brittle ???

Were the Towers floor pans lightweight concrete ???

Were the internal walls all gypsum-based ???

So were the Towers full of construction material which can easily turn to dust ???

Wee hint creative ... the answer is yes to all FIVE questions.

Your desperation for however tiny a victory, however phyrric, is most telling !!!

Freefall? Video Evidence

You again, deserve a medal

 

[I_Gaze_At_The_Blue]

How dumb of an analogy....you trying to say that King Kong slammed his hand down the towers?

Now creative, we all know you do not have a single scientific bone in your body, but even you cannot be stupid enough to think this !!!

For in fact it is an entirely articulate analogy to make ... CriticalThought was clearly showing the impossiblility of a solid block (of whatever) as an accurate depiction of the Towers ... and how, like the martial artist NEEDS his blocks to be spaced so as to TRANSFER load and momentum ... so the same for the Towers.

This was supposed to be a "collapse" and you bring up this kind of B.S.?

The reality of the physics still stands ... the Towers were not solid, one-piece structures, so like the martial artists stack of blocks they will transmit force the same way.

Honestly creative, ignorance is NOT a good place to argue from ... you are showing yourself completely ignorant of simple physics.

CriticalThoughts video is not BS ... but you may be too obtuse to understand why !!!

Now use your head and picture what type of "collapse" can explode everything into fine dust and put a thick layer of dust all over NY and end up with nothing but the steel left at the site of the "collapse"

Why do you expect wallboard, plaster and concrete to survive intact ???

Why do you expect wooden furnishings and internal fittings to remain intact ???

Do you also expect people to remain intact after falling through shredding rubble coming down from hundreds of feet up ???

For in what possible physical reality would these things survive intact ???

Do not other demolitions and collapses not also produce copious quantities of "dust", and in the case of buildings and structured deliberately demolished they are CLEARED out first and yet STILL manage to have their construction materials produce billowing "dust" clouds.

Never heard of FRICTION either, have you creative ???

Are you really so stupid as not to see how inane a point this is ???

Please do not answer for it is entirely rhetorical !!!

 

[I_Gaze_At_The_Blue]

Freefall? Video Evidence

You again, deserve a medal

Why thank you kind sir ... but really creative is easy and mildly amusing, bit like a slinky !!!

Name your poison, sending a virtual dram your way ... :drink:cheers: ... but seems like it's only beer here !!!

 

[I_Gaze_At_The_Blue]

If if were a true collapse the rubble pile would have been so high and dangerous to work around it would not be funny...

Who says it wasn't high and dangerous ???

Looks high to me, but then again it is hard to tell in the one-dimentional imagery of a screen ... sure feels "flat" !!!

Guess for some that is proof enough of it not being a physical three-dimentional pile !!!

But here is my "proof" that Mount Everest is not a high mountain ... refute it if you can !!!

Think about it....

Please do creative, for so far, you have shown yourself somewhat lacking in that department !!!

 

[I_Gaze_At_The_Blue]

if it were a true "collapse" how high would the rubble and twisted steel be....

You first Mr. Sciency ... what do you think it "should" be, utilysing your vast and articulate (sarcasm) knowledge of physics and collapse forensics what height should the rubble have been and why ...

As usual, I predict the dodge and another cretinous YooToob by another rank amateur instead !!!

But for your edumakashum creative, the Towers were about 95% air.

Neatly compacted, a Tower would make a pile about 70/100ft (5 to 7 storeys) high.

There were 5 levels of sub-basement under the Towers so much of the "pile" wound up below-ground.

Yet we still have, at least 3 storey pile of debris ...

(Very large file)
http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/WTC/wtc-photo.jpg

BTW, your great "expert" Cole forgets one simple thing ... the mass was increasing whilst gathering more and more floors, enought to overcome resistance and conservation.

His little hammer slows down because it is just one little hammer, its weight and mass is static and never increases.

He also uses solid blocks which will give a completely different result ... the Towers were NOT solid structures.

He has also never heard of verinage,

As usual it is drivel, with him having the most monotonous voice imaginable !!!

Think he is trying to bore you into submission ... fail there then !!!

But because you have a woefully weak grasp of science I can see why you found it "compelling" !!!

 

[Patria Antiqua]

If you look closely at the smoke in Creative's photos, you can see a star of David.

Also, the Prime Minister of Israel set off a firework that day.

I think we can all see what's going on here.

 

[usda select]

You first Mr. Sciency ... what do you think it "should" be, utilysing your vast and articulate (sarcasm) knowledge of physics and collapse forensics what height should the rubble have been and why ...

As usual, I predict the dodge and another cretinous YooToob by another rank amateur instead !!!

But for your edumakashum creative, the Towers were about 95% air.

Neatly compacted, a Tower would make a pile about 70/100ft (5 to 7 storeys) high.

There were 5 levels of sub-basement under the Towers so much of the "pile" wound up below-ground.

Yet we still have, at least 3 storey pile of debris ...

(Very large file)
http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/WTC/wtc-photo.jpg

BTW, your great "expert" Cole forgets one simple thing ... the mass was increasing whilst gathering more and more floors, enought to overcome resistance and conservation.

His little hammer slows down because it is just one little hammer, its weight and mass is static and never increases.

He also uses solid blocks which will give a completely different result ... the Towers were NOT solid structures.

He has also never heard of verinage,

As usual it is drivel, with him having the most monotonous voice imaginable !!!

Think he is trying to bore you into submission ... fail there then !!!

But because you have a woefully weak grasp of science I can see why you found it "compelling" !!!

Looks like concrete behind the orange bucket.

 

[rivrrat]

Yes there was fortunately people found alive....

But I thought there was only steel and dust?

 

[505]

But I thought there was only steel and dust?

Ahhh... one of you "higher IQ" types. As per the title, this thread is obviously not for you... CD was pondering to the lower IQ's and trying to rally them up again.

 

[OscarB63]

Where do all these brain dead cretins keep coming from? If you are going to believe in a conspircay theory, at least believe in one that isn't so easily debunked.

 

[sokpupet]

Why were all the firemen hearing explosions? Are they all conspiracy promoters? I think not.

9/11 Firefighters: Bombs and Explosions in the WTC

http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/Cnn[1].Pentagon.Jamie.Mcintyre.swf

 

[sokpupet]

Where do all these brain dead cretins keep coming from? If you are going to believe in a conspircay theory, at least believe in one that isn't so easily debunked.

Questioning the events of something this horrendous with so many questions still unanswered to many's satisfaction is not being brain dead or a cretin. If you disagree, then feel free to show the evidence of debunking what is posted or leave the thread. No need to work yourself up and cast aspersions. I would love to see your evidence. Seriously.

 

[rivrrat]

Why were all the firemen hearing explosions? Are they all conspiracy promoters? I think not.

Gee, I dunno. Could have something to do with the raging fire, ruptured gas lines, live electrical wires, and a burning plane inside the ****ing building. Just a guess.

 

[sokpupet]

Gee, I dunno. Could have something to do with the raging fire, ruptured gas lines, live electrical wires, and a burning plane inside the ****ing building. Just a guess.

You know what? I believe FDNY have experience in that sorta stuff and they felt is was not right. I'm not saying there were explosions, they were.

 

[OscarB63]

Gee, I dunno. Could have something to do with the raging fire, ruptured gas lines, live electrical wires, and a burning plane inside the ****ing building. Just a guess.

tons and tons of material collapsing interior air spaces???

 

[rivrrat]

You know what? I believe FDNY have experience in that sorta stuff and they felt is was not right. I'm not saying there were explosions, they were.

really? They had a lot of experience with commercial airliners full of jet fuel flying into skyscrapers, eh?

 

[rivrrat]

tons and tons of material collapsing interior air spaces???

Nooo... couldn't be! That wouldn't happen just because a ****ing commercial plane full of fuel flew inside the damn building. No, if something fell, or 'exploded' as a result of a commercial plane full of fuel flying into a skyscraper, it MUST be controlled demolition. Just doesn't make sense otherwise.

Collapsing interior spaces... pfffttt... as if.

 

[DrunkenAsparagus]

You know what? I believe FDNY have experience in that sorta stuff and they felt is was not right. I'm not saying there were explosions, they were.

No matter how well trained you are, we are still talking about many, many office floors on fire and a lot of stress. The sounds could be from a number of things, including air (remember Blue said that the buildings were 95% air) being forced out the building.

 

[Coronado]

No matter how well trained you are, we are still talking about many, many office floors on fire and a lot of stress. The sounds could be from a number of things, including air (remember Blue said that the buildings were 95% air) being forced out the building.

Since an explosion is, by definition, a violent expansion of gases, and since the building was collapsing at basically terminal velocity, the air between the floors was being pushed out at a high rate of speed. Certain collisions can sound like explosions, too. If you take a 2 × 4 and slap it against a flat concrete surface hard enough, it sounds all the world like a gunshot.

And as to the dust, anyone who has ever seen a building demolished by implosion has seen the same thing. The dust is from the disturbance of the concrete and other building materials.

 

[OscarB63]

Since an explosion is, by definition, a violent expansion of gases, and since the building was collapsing at basically terminal velocity, the air between the floors was being pushed out at a high rate of speed. Certain collisions can sound like explosions, too. If you take a 2 × 4 and slap it against a flat concrete surface hard enough, it sounds all the world like a gunshot.

And as to the dust, anyone who has ever seen a building demolished by implosion has seen the same thing. The dust is from the disturbance of the concrete and other building materials.

but, but, but....derrrrrrr it had to be an inside job because Bush is the devil.

 

[Coronado]

but, but, but....derrrrrrr it had to be an inside job because Bush is the devil.

Yeah, he's so evil that he can manipulate physics. :lamo

 

[rivrrat]

but, but, but....derrrrrrr it had to be an inside job because Bush is the devil.

No no no... all those pictures of piles of rubble, and the survivors bodies were planted by the devil to confuse us. (since, ya know, there WAS no rubble or survivors because EVERYTHING turned to dust except the steel which was molten)

 

[BmanMcfly]

First off... it seems that NOBODY has really even TRIED to 'debunk this'???? You CANNOT... that's honestly as good as you're gonna get, and this video makes every point that I was trying to explain with words... I can 'trust experts' so long as they aren't trying to tell me something that common sense says otherwise.

This one stuck out for me though...

I think this guy is retarded.

Go watch the movie 'idiocracy', you sound like that lawyer telling the judge "and he talks like f*g"

Seriously though, be more specific. Why does he sound retarded?

The argument that the bulding dropped faster than the falling speed wouldn't make any sense with the conspiracy explanation either.

WHAT?!?!?!?! Ok... acceleration. Where the top 'block' of the building collided with the 'lower block' below, INSTEAD of having the acceleration reduced, the acceleration continued at the same rate, so the speed continued to increase. When the physics of the equation says that when there's a collision there's going to be a reduction in acceleration.

Case closed... NIST version debunked. Throw it in the garbage. Don't waste my time by defending it.

Secondly, the floors under can not be compared to an ice cube, since most of the area in a bulding is space.

In a sense I agree... yes, those are 'full'... but the way a building is put together, EVERYTHING is tied to everything. So, while the building is a block constituted mostly of air, it is still a block. I would also note that ice cubes and plaster aren't exactly what you would call 'structural materials'... but the main point was that the top block would break as quickly as the bottom block was broken.... and even then only after many many 'swings'.

Once he went to the larger scale with the bricks and having the same results... what would you have had him do, get some steel girders together and build the building to 1:10 size??

It's a demonstration of principle. It's not like the top block was made of concrete and iron and the bottom was made like a gingerbread house. It's the same material the whole way through.

Thirdly, who the heck makes experiments with ice and think an ice cube behaves like a building.

This is such an inane comment... it proves the point that by DROPPING an object onto another object of the same material what will happen. The point is, even if 5 stories collapsed... 30 stories to account for the whole top block, there's not enough energy left over. Gravities force ONLY = 9.8Newtons

And lastly, his block experiment is also wrong, because WTC wasn't constructed in that way and he needs to heat it up.

It doesn't matter what CAUSED the DROP... when this experiment proves that AFTER the drop there's still not enough energy in the equation.

My question is, if it was a controlled demolition. Why was the collapse so incomplete. Parts of the building was standing up after the collapse and just fell down later. I'm sure if it was a controlled demolition, then one of the corners wouldn't be standing up after the collapse, would it?

Another inane point. Think about it... out of 110 stories it can't be a controlled demolition because there was a corner that stood tall some 5-10 stories up??
You know that it's not what was left standing that matters, but what fell.

 

[Coronado]

First off... it seems that NOBODY has really even TRIED to 'debunk this'???? You CANNOT... that's honestly as good as you're gonna get, and this video makes every point that I was trying to explain with words... I can 'trust experts' so long as they aren't trying to tell me something that common sense says otherwise.

:lamo

Did you miss the first 4-1/2 pages?