9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-10-2015, 09:39 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(28-10-2015 08:48 PM)Fireball Wrote:  
(28-10-2015 04:25 PM)MustangManda Wrote:  There are still quite a lot of people apparently who don't believe that the plane was enough to bring down those buildings. Good to know your structures professor is actively spreading the word otherwise.

I haven't read through this whole thread, but I have a coworker who brought up a loony theory a couple weeks ago that I hadn't heard yet (although I never paid much attention to the 9/11 conspiracies). My coworker swears that a plane never hit the pentagon, and points to the lack of pictures or videos showing the impact. To give him some credit, the sole video is rather terrible/grainy (due to low refresh rate though) and there aren't many good pictures of the plane itself in the pentagon (there's a couple showing plane parts, easy enough to "fabricate" those I suppose...), but there are literally hundreds of eyewitnesses who say it was indeed a plane, people inside and out of the Pentagon. Apparently there are still people though (at least my coworker) who think the government bombed itself with a Tomahawk missile... sigh. I've been trying to avoid non-work-related conversations with him since then. The frustrating thing though is that he isn't remotely dumb, he's a very intelligent engineer, just an overactive imagination I suppose.

Here is a video of the flight of a jet fighter into a reinforced concrete structure. It was done as a demonstration of the ability of a nuclear power plant containment vessel to survive that sort of attack.

https://www.google.com/search?q=jet+flie...8&oe=utf-8

The Pentagon is certain to have that level of building reinforcement, given the mission, I would think..

Except that it doesn't. So there's that. Drinking Beverage

If you've ever been there, it is obvious that the exterior walls are nowhere near that thickness.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 03:34 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(28-10-2015 08:48 PM)Fireball Wrote:  
(28-10-2015 04:25 PM)MustangManda Wrote:  There are still quite a lot of people apparently who don't believe that the plane was enough to bring down those buildings. Good to know your structures professor is actively spreading the word otherwise.

I haven't read through this whole thread, but I have a coworker who brought up a loony theory a couple weeks ago that I hadn't heard yet (although I never paid much attention to the 9/11 conspiracies). My coworker swears that a plane never hit the pentagon, and points to the lack of pictures or videos showing the impact. To give him some credit, the sole video is rather terrible/grainy (due to low refresh rate though) and there aren't many good pictures of the plane itself in the pentagon (there's a couple showing plane parts, easy enough to "fabricate" those I suppose...), but there are literally hundreds of eyewitnesses who say it was indeed a plane, people inside and out of the Pentagon. Apparently there are still people though (at least my coworker) who think the government bombed itself with a Tomahawk missile... sigh. I've been trying to avoid non-work-related conversations with him since then. The frustrating thing though is that he isn't remotely dumb, he's a very intelligent engineer, just an overactive imagination I suppose.

Here is a video of the flight of a jet fighter into a reinforced concrete structure. It was done as a demonstration of the ability of a nuclear power plant containment vessel to survive that sort of attack.

https://www.google.com/search?q=jet+flie...8&oe=utf-8

The Pentagon is certain to have that level of building reinforcement, given the mission, I would think.
I don't know the construction details of the pentagon but I highly doubt that it is reinforced to the same degree as a nuclear containment vessel Frusty
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes adey67's post
29-10-2015, 09:57 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
The Pentagon was built in the early 40s. I'm fairly confident they were not concerned with protecting it against a nuclear blast.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BnW's post
29-10-2015, 11:36 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(28-10-2015 04:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  When the floors started pancaking they damaged the structural system so that it was no longer self-supporting.

ROFLMAO

Well it is so curious that the NIST says this:

Quote:NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor system—that connected the core columns and the perimeter columns—consisted of a grid of steel “trusses” integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/w...towers.cfm

Laugh out load Laugh out load Laugh out load

psik
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-10-2015, 11:45 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Thumbsup

That is pretty much what every one has been saying.

The floors did not fail. The supporting wall trusses failed.

Now (Completely talking off the cuff etc) , with no personal knowledge or understanding of things, what I gather is the sagging of the floors due to deformation/heat etc were what 'pulled' the wall/support trusses inwards and hence were the things that kept the whole formation falling straight down.

So. planes impact buildings. Fuel/aluminum/office supplies/etc all ignite. Massive heat generated by internal fires. Wall trusses heat and bend. Floor (What were the floor things technically called, any way? Or were they just 'floors'?) 'bits' sag downwards, pulling wall trusses inwards. Wall trusses fail and 'Rumble-splat' buildings come down.

Anything wrong with all that psikeyhackr?

Also, your link doesn't seem to want to work. Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-10-2015, 03:20 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Still wearing that tin foil hat and masturbating to these conspiracy theories I see psik, make sure you use lots of lube and rub one out for me cupcake. Tongue Big Grin Yes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-10-2015, 11:25 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(29-10-2015 11:45 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  Anything wrong with all that psikeyhackr?

Also, your link doesn't seem to want to work. Consider

Tell it to the NIST.

I just tried the link with two different computers. A Dell running Firefox and a Samsung Chromebook and the link worked fine on both of them. So it seems you are just good for dishing out BS.

You so called debunkers talking about pancaking who don't know the NIST already denied it are truly hysterical.

psik
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-10-2015, 11:51 AM (This post was last modified: 30-10-2015 11:57 AM by adey67.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Dude you have been thoroughly debunked and totally owned on numerous occasions and have constantly refused to answer direct questions about your stance on this issue, also your arguments have been consistently single issue, self righteous condescending and patronising and hugely disrespectful to the victims of this very human tragedy.

You are a joke, a clown who does not listen, stubborn to the point of stupidity and totally divorced from reality and someone for whom it is incredibly difficult to have any respect for. This is why I rip the piss out of you.

Get a life, try to be a little objective ask yourself honestly and with a modicum of humility do you really believe this bullshit conspiracy theory or have you got into a circular argument from which you stubbornly refuse to give up ?

You have been totally owned you lost the argument, you lost it ages ago, give it up and move on man.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-10-2015, 03:28 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(30-10-2015 11:51 AM)adey67 Wrote:  You are a joke, a clown who does not listen, stubborn to the point of stupidity and totally divorced from reality and someone for whom it is incredibly difficult to have any respect for. This is why I rip the piss out of you.

Get a life, try to be a little objective ask yourself honestly and with a modicum of humility do you really believe this bullshit conspiracy theory or have you got into a circular argument from which you stubbornly refuse to give up ?

It ain't about conspiracies, it's about physics.

Clowns with degrees can't come up with physical or virtual models in FOURTEEN YEARS and say nothing about having accurate data on steel and concrete distributions down the buildings. Delusional Physics for MORONS!!!

But supposedly climate scientists can make relevant climate models for 100 years into the future. A cubic mile of water weighs how much compared to a WTC tower? Having climate models but not measly skyscraper models is hilariously ironic.

The 9/11 Affair is a planetary joke. All you can do is TALK and try to insult.

TOTAL FAIL!

Laugh out load

psik
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-10-2015, 03:33 PM (This post was last modified: 30-10-2015 03:53 PM by adey67.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Thanks for just confirming everything I just previously wrote Thumbsup
What the weight of a mile of water in a climate model has to do with the twin towers is anyone's guess but it sounds like obfuscation of argument to me. However lets imagine they do all the models you want and the results are the same how would you feel then ? I suspect its not physics you are interested in but rather validation of your beliefs . Also its all about conspiracy because if the planes did not bring down the buildings then something else did and that leaves only the demolition theory in the viewfinder so yes its all about conspiracy theories nice try.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: