http://gamingtrend.com
August 01, 2014, 11:57:12 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 9/11 conspiracy video  (Read 3386 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Dafones
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2150


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: May 30, 2006, 03:03:53 PM »

Quote from: "Greggy_D"
Another one to think about is the Oklahoma City Bombing.  The government imploded the building one month after April 19th.  Why would you demolish a major crime scene just a month after the "crime"?  Not unless you're hiding something.


Depends on how unsafe the remaining structure was, how possible a collapse was.
Logged

Now Playing: GTA - San Andreas [PS2]
Yoshi's Island DS [DS]
Greggy_D
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1093


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: May 30, 2006, 03:53:52 PM »

Quote
Officials said the implosion was a necessary part of the psychological recovery for the citizens of Oklahoma City.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153635,00.html


Or to quickly hide evidence that bombs were used within.
Logged
raydude
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1506


SPICE! Nomnomnomnom


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: May 30, 2006, 07:17:39 PM »

Quote from: "Dafones"

But, if there is one thing that has always bugged me about 9/11, right from day one, is that the collapse of the two towers has always struck me as odd. Not that I have anything to compare it to - nothing at all - but the way both towers fell has always seemed very, I don't know, precise. Very controlled. Very clean. I would just naturally assume that there would be more chaos to their destruction if they were to fall after being struck as they were.


To what would you attribute this assumption? You said it yourself that you have nothing to compare it to. Let me try to find the connection. Its Hollywood, isn't it? Hollywood tells us that buildings shouldn't collapse cleanly or without a big fireball. To which I say, that's Hollywood, and it almost never gets reality right because reality is a little too "boring".

So lets think about the reality of the tower collapsing. One support beam ruptures, causing catastrophic failure of a floor, which causes the whole floor to fall to the floor below it. Granted, it doesn't all fall at the same time, but its close enough to make the entire floor below it fail at almost the same time. And each time the floor beneath gets closer and closer to collapsing all at once because at a certain point it doesn't matter if mass X arrives at the north side 0.5 seconds before mass Y arrives at the south side.

To the human eye it looks like the entire floor is collapsing in a neat, orderly manner, because it is, because of physics, because that's the way the building was meant to fail.

To say one expected the building to fail otherwise is an insult to the architecht and engineers who built it. I mean, if I were building a skyscraper I'd make damn sure it failed catastrophically inward, rather than falling outward and damaging other buildings.
Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush.
"Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."
Victoria Raverna
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1089


Auspiciousness, prosperity, and good fortune


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: May 30, 2006, 08:33:25 PM »

Quote from: "Dafones"
Yeah, like Fox would have the balls to air a show that features an American politician planning a terror attack on home soil in order to gain military and political control over the populace, and milk the situation for profit. I wonder if Bill O'Reilly could have a cameo.


24 did just that a few season ago and did that again this season with high ranking whitehouse personnel helping terrorists setting up terror attack on home soil and getting WMD so that they can get pretext to deploy troops to gain access to oil resources.smile
Logged
Dafones
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2150


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: May 31, 2006, 01:29:01 AM »

No kiddin'? Wow. Good for them.
Logged

Now Playing: GTA - San Andreas [PS2]
Yoshi's Island DS [DS]
Dafones
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2150


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: May 31, 2006, 01:34:28 AM »

And to answer raydude's post ... well, I'd just figure the horizontal, I dunno ... span, range, scope, whatever ... of the collapse would have been greater. Especially for the tower that was clipped off to the side. Unequal damage meaning unsymmetrical structural integrity?

And I'm not talking about anything drastic here, more just one corner above the damaged section giving way before the opposing corner, which would bring about an uneven collapse, and mainly a sort of fold in the tower. Considering the damage, I find it odd how equal/symmetrical the fall of both towers is. They drop right down, and I find that strange.

That's all.
Logged

Now Playing: GTA - San Andreas [PS2]
Yoshi's Island DS [DS]
Victoria Raverna
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1089


Auspiciousness, prosperity, and good fortune


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: May 31, 2006, 02:01:57 AM »

Quote from: "Dafones"
And to answer raydude's post ... well, I'd just figure the horizontal, I dunno ... span, range, scope, whatever ... of the collapse would have been greater. Especially for the tower that was clipped off to the side. Unequal damage meaning unsymmetrical structural integrity?

And I'm not talking about anything drastic here, more just one corner above the damaged section giving way before the opposing corner, which would bring about an uneven collapse, and mainly a sort of fold in the tower. Considering the damage, I find it odd how equal/symmetrical the fall of both towers is. They drop right down, and I find that strange.

That's all.


That probably can be explained in that the collapse was not caused by the impact since the building was designed to be able to withstand impact from airplane, but was caused by structural weakening due to heat from fire.

As we know steel like most metal are efficient heat conductor so any increase in temperature in one section of the steel is probably going to be distributed almost equally to all sections. When the temperature of steel reach high enough to weaken the steel until it can't hold the weight of the building, it'll collapse down pretty much evenly.
Logged
Dafones
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2150


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: May 31, 2006, 04:07:28 AM »

And so the heat spread out evenly through the buildings, along each floor, down each floor, from top to bottom?

But I don't know anything. I'm not an engineer. Maybe once the ball gets rolling, so to speak, as the tops of the buildings start to come down where the internal structure is weakest, it really doesn't matter how strong or weak the lower levels are - they just get sandwiched, compressed, and add to the mass coming down, keeping the "clean", vertical destruction going.
Logged

Now Playing: GTA - San Andreas [PS2]
Yoshi's Island DS [DS]
unbreakable
Guest
« Reply #48 on: May 31, 2006, 04:56:50 AM »

Now I may be wrong, but didn't large parts of the building actually fall into the street and crush other adjacent buildings?

I have a CD with all kinds of 9/11 stuff which was made a few weeks afterward, I'll try and find it.
Logged
Dafones
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2150


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: May 31, 2006, 05:41:03 AM »

Please do. Again, that stinkin' video wants to portray the notion that the nearby buildings came out relatively untouched.
Logged

Now Playing: GTA - San Andreas [PS2]
Yoshi's Island DS [DS]
Victoria Raverna
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1089


Auspiciousness, prosperity, and good fortune


View Profile
« Reply #50 on: May 31, 2006, 08:24:51 AM »

Quote from: "Dafones"
And so the heat spread out evenly through the buildings, along each floor, down each floor, from top to bottom?

But I don't know anything. I'm not an engineer. Maybe once the ball gets rolling, so to speak, as the tops of the buildings start to come down where the internal structure is weakest, it really doesn't matter how strong or weak the lower levels are - they just get sandwiched, compressed, and add to the mass coming down, keeping the "clean", vertical destruction going.


My theory is that heat spread evenly through the steel skeleton of the building. Even if the fire is uneven, steel is a good heat conductor, it'll spread to the whole steel structure.
Logged
warning
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7325



View Profile
« Reply #51 on: May 31, 2006, 11:29:54 AM »

Not much for the conspiracy theories myself but I always wondered about 7 World Trade Center, the building that collapsed later that afternoon.
Logged
raydude
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1506


SPICE! Nomnomnomnom


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: May 31, 2006, 01:40:55 PM »

Quote from: "Dafones"
And so the heat spread out evenly through the buildings, along each floor, down each floor, from top to bottom?

But I don't know anything. I'm not an engineer. Maybe once the ball gets rolling, so to speak, as the tops of the buildings start to come down where the internal structure is weakest, it really doesn't matter how strong or weak the lower levels are - they just get sandwiched, compressed, and add to the mass coming down, keeping the "clean", vertical destruction going.


Even if one is not an engineer it is still easier to educate oneself now more than ever. Rather than sitting back and saying "hmmmm, it does seem rather strange that the building collapsed straight down" one could go out and do a wikipedia search on "steel", do a search on steel and heat, jp4 jet fuel, etc. Theres really no excuse now for just sitting back and taking a conspiracy theory at face value.

If one thinks that even one or two conspiracy points are valid because "one is not an engineer" then it would seem logical to seek out the truth and try to draw one's own conclusions. The worst that could happen is that one learns more about the conductive properties of steel.
Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush.
"Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."
jament
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 374



View Profile
« Reply #53 on: May 31, 2006, 03:41:07 PM »

True.  And the conductive properties of steel would require temperatures that the burning jet fuel could not possible have produced to either "soften" or "melt" the steel infrastructure of the towers.

On the issue of the building collapse, that's what the building's "free-fall" calculation was all about.  The arguement was that the building fell at almost a free-fall speed, inferring that it discounts the floor-by-floor pancaking theory, since each floor would slow the descent from the free-fall speed.

I certainly don't think I've seen enough evidence to suggest the government blew up the building, but I also haven't seen an explanation of the tower collapse that makes any scientific sense.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #54 on: May 31, 2006, 05:37:55 PM »

Quote from: "unbreakable"
Quote from: "Blackadar"
If someone can find a photo of a Cruise Missile, or some fragment of a detonator used in the twin towers, or clear, definitive proof that some of these supposed hijackers are alive, or something, then I'd be much more inclined to believe it.  There's just too many folks involved for a cover-up to work.  We're talking 1000s.  First responders.  The folks who sorted through the debris.  Eyewitnesses.  Cameras.  Media.  Victims.  Airlines.  Etc.


Fat chance.  They sure got rid of all the debris pretty fast and shipped it all overseas, huh?

I know when there are airplane accidents, they keep the debris in storage, sometimes for years.  Amazing how they had it all cleared out, and shipped out, so quickly, especially with so many questions allegedly left unanswered.


Regardless, there were still 1000s of people involved.  The folks who were sorting through the debris at Fresh Kills.  The firefighters and policemen.  The construction workers who had the clear the site.  Average citizens who were in the twin towers.  News media.  And so on and so forth.  Yet not one piece of tangible evidence has surfaced?  No one found anything?  Or that everyone is "in on it"?  Bah.

The simplest explanation is usually the right one - that such evidence doesn't exist because it didn't happen.  Remember, I'm still troubled by some of the inconsistencies.  But the evidence is soooo sketchy right now that it's non-existent.
Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
raydude
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1506


SPICE! Nomnomnomnom


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: May 31, 2006, 06:26:56 PM »

Quote from: "jament"
True.  And the conductive properties of steel would require temperatures that the burning jet fuel could not possible have produced to either "soften" or "melt" the steel infrastructure of the towers.


From what little I know of civil engineering, engineers typically do not design to an 'absolute' melting point for many reasons. One of them being that the fatigue level of materials cannot be absolutely pinpointed down to an exact temperature or lifetime.  Hence engineers insert 'safety factors' where they multiply the maximum weight by N and overdesign a structure.  

Even so, there are still a lot of unknowns when it comes to answering 'why' a particular material fails. A spectacular case in point is the failure of the "O-Rings" for the Challenger disaster. The O-Rings were judged as "good enough" based on inspection for the shuttle to be able to fly. There simply was no magic "sensor" that one could use that would have predicted the failure of the rings, especially after previous launches showed that the rings were able to withstand the cold temperatures before launch.

Back to the WTC, I have no doubt that the steel did NOT melt or soften. However, those are NOT the only ways that steel fails or fatigues. Steel can expand under heat and if that expansion is blocked or diverted in some way it can generate stress at a given point. Too much stress and you have   structural failure. Too many of those and you have catastrophic failure.

These same unknowns as far as metal fatigue are the reasons why we have military jets or helicopters just 'seizing up' and failing. If we knew all there was to know about materials then we could prevent such failures altogether. At least the ones due to metal fatigue.
Logged

A Pew Research Center poll found nearly half of Americans hold the false belief that TARP was passed under President Obama, while only 34 percent know it originated under Bush.
"Oh yeah?" Bush replied. "50% of the people were wrong."
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.111 seconds with 55 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.032s, 2q)