Science can't explain 9/11

Why dont you guys just f##$king blow your brains out now and save all the anguish of knowing that EVERY EFIING thing is a dark plot or conspiracy and 'none of what you know' is true.

I REALLY dont see how you deal with it.

Smoking... if there is ONE bona fide team with a steel construction engineer AND a pyrological engineer who says that the twin tower explanations are fishy, then cite them. SURELY someone has thought of it!!!!

Meantime, if you want to really test it for yourself.. here's how.

Get a small charcoal grill.. any old one would do.
Make sure there are several holes in the bottom at least 3/4inch
some diesel fuel {close to JP}
Some GAS GRILL briquets.
A reversible vacuum, or wet-dry vac.
Soak the briquets in the diesel fuel.

Take half the soaked briquets and put in the grill and put the grill rack on the grill close to briquets as you can, about 3/4 to 1 inch would be best.

Now light them, note the effect on the grill rack.

Once it cools, take the rack off and replace the briquets with the rest of soaked ones and replace the rack. Position a blower hose from the vac under the grill aimed at the holes in the bottom.. I think a spacing of about 3-4 inches from would replicate a 20mph draft.

Light them and once they start burning well, turn on the blower. Note you DO want to do this outside and away from flammables.

NOW what do you think will happen to the rack?

After you see that, then go get a piece of scrap drywall, break it in chunks the size of briquets, set in diesel for one minute, and repeat test.

 

I deal with it just fine. Way better than you do apparently.

I'll do exactly that (post "bonafide" sources) if you tell me exactly what that entails, aparently the sources i've posted by the formost expert at the time who was at the scene is not enough for you. So I'll fufill your challenge as soon as you set realistic parameters.

I'm doing this for other readers, simply because I can care less about you and your closed mind, your name calling, your psychological profile of me and anyone who has questions.

Your a joke. You let the TV tell you what the believe. You've never once had a position that was not fully mainstream and packaged by the media.

You've not once rebutted anything I've posted and probably to arrogant to read it, have blindly posted derogatory remarks pulling this discussion or my lone postings toward the ARE YOU CRAZY bin...

So sir, give me parameters and tell me what is bonafide in your eyes... and read a damn source and critic the source, not me, because I simply present the questions and the possible arguements, and i bravely post my beliefs so that others can educate themselves... whether I'm wrong or not.

 

Its a total waste of time trying to debate someone who insults you in a discussion.

 

Excellent post Mo. I found it very well thought out and informative.

 

Listen...
I havent even come CLOSE to 'insult' on this.

How the hell can you say I have a closed mind... I actually THINK about how it could happen.

WHAT LINKS, Smokin?

YOU HAVE NOT PROVIDED ANY that pass a common sense test!!
This, for instance, is GARBAGE!

Since WHEN is a statement that one cant explain everything 'implicit acknowledgement' that a theory is wrong or a product of conspiracy?

Refer to the third bolded statement. Explain to me how demolition charges placed anywhere in the building can cause it to 'freefall' implode.

My Answer: It cant be proved, EITHER WAY, because the laws of physics WERENT violated. The laws of physics CANT be violated
It takes a WRONG ASSUMPTION -"Free-fell"- and ties preselected 'fact' to it.

As to the specifics of what actually DID happen.. AGAIN 'Physics' was involved... I agree Mo explained it very well.

I cant explain the lack of metallurgical testing, either. But I dont know it HASNT happened, do you? I bet there was and if there's a conspiracy, I'm betting it has to do with a whole different reason or scenario.

Here's a hint: Ask John Edwards about it.

 

The official and excepted explanation of the collapses of the towers, buildings 1 and 2, were that the damaged upper portion of the buildings were ravaged by fires, heating up the truses enough that the each floor had collapsed onto the next causing the building to collape in a pancake fashion. Right? Well, in order for this to happen, the pancaked floors at the top would have to have hit the floors below them one by one... creating friction, resistance, and a delay... al beit slight in thier scenario.

The pancake theory is bunk for two reasons:

1) The buildings were shown to fall at freefall speed, the speed at which an object would fall if unimpeded from any height. This demonstrates NO IMPEDENCE which would be impossible if the floors below had to give...

2) Pancaked floors would have piled up on top of each other leaving a stack of floors somewhere near the bottom. There was none. Also the core columns that made up the entire center of the building from bedrock to antennae would have been sticking out of the center of the pile...

Funny, when computers have simulated this collapse... IE NOVA, PopMech, debunking pieces... they leave these columns out of the blueprint or simply do not reference them.

What I find amazing is that even though the official account is not all inclusive... it leaves out building 7 as if it didnt happen that day... leaves out that a handful of supposed terrorists who conducted the crimes are still alive, that the most credible eye witnesses, the firemen, heard explosions post impact, the molten steel that was found at the scene that all of the sudden didnt exist, the vaporizing of two airplanes on the same day.... UGH VAPORIZE??? THATS IN THE OFFICIAL STORY.... VAPORIZE??? TITAINIUM??

The things is... you guys hold me to explain the WHOLE story to you... all i have to do is DOUBT the officialy story and prove why that doubt is valid.

I can tell you guys havent read most of this material with an open mind... not because you dont believe the gov't did it, or it was an inside job, but because if you read the 9/11 commision report, and the books and reports afterward... they are absurd.

At some point MATT LAUER was cited as a credible witness in Mo's reply about how he is way smarter than his brothers... C'mon... the leading expert on building fires says one thing, but since MATT LAUER says otherwise it must be true.

Much respect to all of you... but if Cleveland Mo's reply is considered informative and its an unreferenced regurgitated version of official story with quotes that I've never heard before... and Petty's comparison of a building to a BBQ is enough to keep you from reading on thats fine... its ignorant and arrogant... but to each their own.

My favorite is this:

I'm sorry, but how many buildings have you and Matt Lauer watch collapse together? What caused those buildings to collapse?

I'm also sorry, but this can apply to both sides dont you think?

I'll give you some slack... I wont tell anybody if you doubt the official story... but if you do... you might be a conspiracy theorist... or even an intelligent inquisitive human being...

IF YOU DO DOUBT IT... you have ask why? how? was this investigation bungled, incomplete. Thats all...

 

Right after the first World Trade Center tower collapsed, at 9:59 a.m. on September 11, 2001, Father John Delendick--one of New York Fire Department's chaplains--ran down a ramp to below the nearby World Financial Center, so as to escape the dust cloud. There he met with Deputy Chief Ray Downey, the head of the FDNY's Special Operations Command. Delendick asked Downey if the jet fuel from the plane had blown up, thus causing the South Tower to collapse. According to Delendick, Downey "said at that point he thought there were bombs up there because it was too even."

World Trade Center Task Force Interview: Father John Delendick, City of New York, December 6, 2001 (pages 5-6).

I've posted this before, but i cant find where and I'm not about to look for it. Please comment on this. Is Cleveland Mo, the teacher / metalurgist / distaster investigator / smartest person is his family & Matt Lauer, pretty boy newscaster / talk show host a better resource for collapse information than Ray Downey? The countries foremost expert on building collapse?

Of most importance is that one of Downey's areas of expertise was building collapses. 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer referred to Downey as a "very, very respected expert on building collapse."[1] Robert Ingram, a battalion chief in the New York Fire Department, has called him "the premiere collapse expert in the country." [2] And Fire Chief Mike Antonucci, who was a best friend of Downey's, said he "was probably the most knowledgeable person on building collapses there was. That was his [hobby], to study building collapses--what affected the engineering of buildings, how they [would] weaken and how he could respond and stay safe." [3]

[1] National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States: Eleventh Public Hearing, May 18, 2004.
[2] Robert Ingram, Testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. October 11, 2001.
[3] Liset Marquez, "Upland Firefighters and Families Affected by 9-11 Tragedy." Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, September 7, 2006.

Anyone?

 

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA

Enjoy my new signature!

 

I asked my thirty something son: "How can people think like that?"
He answered immediately: "You dont know any stoners?"

Enjoy mine!

 

Wow... I've seen the light. Your ability to refute with validity any point that i bring to this argument has caused me to change my mind on the issue.

I appreciate your attention to detail. Can you send me the version of Doctor Spock you raised your son on? I'd love to grow up to be just as judgemental and self righteous as you 'fog.

I bet your son read up on all of it to, or he's obviously a respect sociologist / psychologist to give such a great dismissive analysis.

 

heh...

 

9/11 Commision say CIA obstucted justice

Not the whole commission just the guys who ran it...

Editorial in the NY Times =

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opini ... ref=slogin

Enjoy.

 

Japan's Parliment Discuss 9/11 Conspiracy

http://benjaminfulford.com/Transcript%2 ... 20911.html

This discussion is mostly about who the Japanese see as the victims of 9/11, whether the War On Terror is valid, and OF COURSE presentation of evidence and coincidences that raise doubt on who actually planned and conducted the attacks on September 11th, 2001.