PolyNewbie

The steel was weakened, sure, but only by as much as half in the most weakened areas which were small. But simple arithmetic, the NIST diagrams of temperatures and damage, and a knowledge of the standards on which the building was built shows it shouldn't have collapsed. You don't need to be a civil engineer to see that. The official hypothesis gets changed all the time. There was no investigation as to how the buildings actually collapsed. The investigation stops at collapse initiation.

We have scientific experts saying the collapse is impossible. You have nothing. The Zelikow Keane report doesn't go near it and the FEMA report says the official version has a "low probability of occurance". You in essence, have Bill O'Reilly and a variety of other presstitutes. Thats it.

Guided missiles have been built - which is essentially what the plane was turned into. Its not a big stretch to think explosives could be cased in something to withstand the fuel fires. Its a bigger stretch to think to inexperienced pilots could guide the planes in with that much precision - at least according to Pilots For 911 truth. Where is your proof that terrorists were even on the plane ? We know there wasn't nearly enough structural damage because the buildings remained standing firm after the crashes. They did not bend due to wind loads. In a few hot spots maybe but not over a great area of the structure. Most of it was under 500 deg C on the surface of the beams in both structures.

Apparently absolutely nothing - as is normally the case. You could click on the links I posted and learn something but I guess those links are only for conspiracy theorists and you wouldn't dare look at them because you are not a conspiracy theorist.

6 year old in handcuffs Its not the first 6 year old they have arrested. I guess whena 6 year starts crying the teacher can't pick them up they have the empire come and arrest them instead. No way these guys ever could have carried out 911. Us conspiracy theorists must be crazy. The government loves you. "“Believe me when I tell you,” said Chief Mercurio, “a 6-year-old can inflict injury to you just as much as any other person.” Thank god for that body armour. God save the queen.

I didn't say there wasn't passengers but it would be silly to think the planes couldn't be guided in by computer. No but its easy to see that there wasn't enough damage - not nearly enough. The designers of the wtc admit that the building was designed to take such an impact and explained that the bulding was like a screen on a door and that a plane could poke through it and leave the building standing. In fact that is what was observed as well. The buildings remained standing after the impacts. The fires did not cause the steel to heat up very much at all - only a few supports got hot enough for half strength. The building strength was more than enough to just hold up the weight - the natural frequency of the building didn't change and it didn't bend. All of a sudden the buildings both started to fail then gradually blew apart from to to bottom at near freefall speed. Both buildings collapsed the exact same way even though the planes hit in different locations.

How come its never happened before with completed buildings except in controlled demolitions ?

Maybe the planes were automatically guided in and those terrorists were not even on the planes - the flight manifest doesn't show any of these terrorists on the planes and the government had their pictures up a few days later and knew exactly who did the "attacks". Funny how some of them are still alive and well after crashing these planes into those buildings. That and just because experts who normally investigate accidents like this were never allowed on the scene and the evidence was destroyed doesn't mean anything. People should trust Philip Zelikow (a professional propogandist that has never investigated anything) and Keane (who did the Oklahoma & Kennedy investigations) to tell the American people the truth. After all - no one wants to go to war and make all that money.

Its supposed to be the reason why we are in Afghanistan fighting the war for heroine war for a natural gas pipeline war for imperial hedgemony war on terror. If 911 is shown to be a fraud so is the Afghanistan war. You don't have to make definitive calculations. Its obvious enough before you put pencil to paper. You are deluding yourself into thinking you understand this or science in general.

No. The initial rate of collapse and early time rate of collapse is very near freefall speed. The estimates vary for total collapse but the destruction early in the event and rate of fall leave a large energy deficit if the official version is held to be true.

The videos indicate that that isn't the case, but even if it was the same logic would apply. The dust blown outward had to have energy. That energy would come from the kinetic energy of the collapsing building and therefore slow it down. Judging from the videos and the debris patterns reported by NIST (and that there are many photos of) the energy required would slow the collapse down greatly. again, irrelevant. Obviously that isn't the case. You should stay out of scientific arguements when you too have no idea of what you are talking about. "Tuthies" have well respected scientists on their side. You should remember that and the fact that the "official" investigators were in no way qualified forensic scientists and the qualified folks were kept away from this investigation and much of the evidence was destroyed when criticising "Truthies". Plus the official investigation does not attempt to explain the orderly and expedient nature of the collapse - the primary evidence of controlled devices being used.

Debunkers hide from debate ScottsA and Riverwind should share their courage with these folks and help them show everyone how ridiculous 911 conspiracy theories are.

Only by a second. Wrong again. The NIST report admits 8 & 10 seconds. You can watch the video and see the building being converted to dust as the explosion rolls down the height of the building. Its as plain as the nose on your face. If thats not enough the lack of concrete and dust at the building footprint after the coollapse should be convincing enough. Half of that concrete being ejected from the building and being converted to dust would be more than enough to slow the building collapse down by about half since more than half of the mass was being ejected - we know this from the patterns of debris in the NIST report. This is obvious - like a mountain weighs more than a mouse kind of obvious even if you can't weigh the mountain. I will link those patterns if you stop posting this nonsense. So I can't say for sure that a mountain weighs more than a mouse because I can't weigh the mountain ? Thats your logic.

No ScottsA that not what I am doing. Having taken this biology and having someone tell you that a tree is a snowy owl you may be able to correct them. Thats more closely analogeous to what I am doing. You should stick to what you know because its getting too easy to make a fool out of you in your feeble attempts to discredit me when you can't win arguements. Rioverwind makes such obvious and basic scientific errors its clear that he has not the slightest idea of what he is talking about. His force analysis on the table with the missing leg should make that clear to even a biology or history student given that I have never taken history in school but I can still tell you when the war of 1812 occured. I've mnade it quite clear exactly why he is wrong in every example except his explanation about a flame making an object hotter than the flame that is applied to heat it. Again, any history or biology student should be able to see how rediculous his scientific reasoning is. We all know that heat travels from a hot substance to a cold substance and not the reverse making the following statement the ramblings of a fool: Riverwind: "Heat is nothing more than energy. When something burns it releases energy. The amount of heat generated by something burning depends on the substance being burned, however, once the heat is created it has to go somewhere. If this heat is trapped for some reason then this energy can accumulate in a location and theoretically cause the temperature to rise higher than the temperature of the flame." Now thats all of Riverwinds scientific statements reduced to nonsense.

I am quite bit more competent than you are at structural engineering and physics ScottsA, having taken university level courses in both. With this background I can say with certainty that almost all of Riverwinds scientific statements are dead wrong. Systems behave according to the laws of thermodynamics always but in order to get to specific numbers you must establish a boundary of the system. One can easily say that the only source of energy according to the official version was the potential energy of the standing building. The fact that the buildings collapsed at freefall speed leaves no energy available to eject the masses upward and outward or break the concrete into dust. Draw your boundaries as you wish, but stick to topics you understand.

Nope. No one is saying what caused the collapse of wtc7 except a few presstitutes and a few annonymous posters on the internet. That hardly adds up to credibility. No one is doubting what was seen on video. Its a question of what caused it. Wrong. If the official version is shown to be impossible and that its physically impossible to have happened without bombs in the building then we don't have to show exactly what happened. Thats a silly arguement. I bet you are not a lawyer.

I suppose that is true. All that dust and rubble could be a bunch of people cleaning their apartments and offices all at one time or maybe the garbage men had a strike and dumped everything in a symmetrical arrangement around the wtc buildings just before Osama attacked. I guess you are not wrong about everything after all.

Lyndon LaRouche has a lot to say about the manufactering capability of a country and its economy. He has MP3's on his web site about economics that can be listened to for free. LaRouche was demonized by the corporate media and actually jailed by the Bush administration (GHW Bush) which gives him loads of credibility alone in my mind. A countries true wealth is in its natural resources and manufactering capability. One way the globalists are destroying the nation state is to implement free trade and destroy the manufactering capability. This dissolves the nation state and its protections that it provides its citizens. This helps puts us toward a world corporate (fascist) system where individuals become units of production and have no more rights than a hammer in a tool box. LaRouche was labeled and demonized as a fascist by the corporate media who in itself is working in concert with the corporations to implement a fascist state and implement feudalism as a world government. This transition may encounter resistance so they are building prison camps all over the country - every international banker controlled country on the earth. They are at war with the countries that will not allow the IMF come in and control their currency.

Fortunately for us you have no idea about science or what any of us are talking about. Riverwinds statements on science are completely wrong and can be seen as ridiculous by anyone with an elementary understanding of basic principles. Its not that the statements made are stateed incorrectly and that I am being picky - they are just about as wrong as you can be. Not knowing anything about science doesn't stop you from commenting which you are as big as a fool as Riverwind. There are maps published by NIST that clearly illustrate the material distribution around the site. If I post a link to these will you stop polluting this thread with your nonsense ? Not true. This can be determined from the NIST report material distribution around the area after the collapses.

As the buildings collapsed at what is admitted to be near freefall speed large parts of the buildings were ejected both outward and upward at high velocity. This is plainly obvious from the videos of the collapses of wtc1 & wtc2. Since nearly all of the potential energy was involved in the near free fall rate of the collapse an additional energy source had to be present to cause the mass of the building that was ejected to be ejected -as well as at such high velocity. The pictures of the post collapse area show that most of the mass of the building lay outside its original footprint therefore most of the mass was ejected from the building during the collapse. This shows a clear violation of the first law of thermodynamics - bombs had to be present to eject that mass. One does not need to measure the mass of a mountain to know it weighs more than a mouse. Its obvious why NIST didn't actually investigate the collapse and stopped investigating at the collapse initiation point. I don't consider NIST a credible document. The people that created it are not experts in accident forensics, real experts in this field were restricted from viewing the evidence or participating in the investigation. A propogandist directed the investigation that consisted of the participation of engineers that happen to be involved in another highly suspicious "terrorist" attack - Oklahoma which the evidence points to bombs being placed inside the building as a matter of congressional record. The report on this was written by an armed forces bomb expert & colonel who testified the McVeigh truck bomb did not have the energy to sever the support beams - therefore bombs had to hjave been inside the building. Kean was also involved in the Kennedy investigation. It seems that the same key indiciduals are used to investigate these terrorist attacks while qualified forensic people that normally invetigate these accidents are restricted from taking part. This means cover - up. It doesn't matter how obvious the official version can be shown to be a lie, there will always be some people that force themselves to believe whatever nonsense the government come up with. They don't have to convince everyone. Even when gov is shown to have both lied and benefitted from the act it still is not enough to raise questions with some folks. George Bush is god, the moon is made of cheese and that really was bin Laden in those 911 confession videos.

No it isn't. You need very high temperatures to start the reaction - a burning magnesium strip is often employed, plus his evidence shows that sulfur was used as an accelerant. You also need concentrations in the form of ground up particles. Again another keeper. No fires in that part of the building and it remained standing long after that damage and as you say, no wind. Its easy to see that the amount of material ejected exceeded the amount of energy that would be available. If I stack pennies three feet high you can bet there is more than a dollar there without actually counting them. I need to investigate what you mean by pivot point in this discussion. I recall you saying you were an engineer and I keep asking you what discipline you are in so that I have a starting point to look up your silly theories. The way I understand it a baseball can be made to spin but has no pivot point as it spins through the air. I'm going to go back to ignoring you.

PrisonPlanet / Bees Here is a good article on the subject of bees that has many links and expert commentary - what I have normally come to expect from Alex Jones website. (www.prisonplanet.com) This article also shows that the bee populations have been steadily declining. Its interseting also that a German professor was stopped from researching the reasons for this by his university as stated in the link. This makes it sound like a globalist plot since they control education through UNESCO and funding through various research grant foundations.

Thats another keeper. Now I have 5 Riverwind quotes regarding scientific fact that demonstrate 100 % incompetence by you. Quantum Mechanics doesn't work above the atomic level thats why they are working on "unified theory" to bridge the contradictions between relativity and quantum mechanics. No. that conversation ended after I posted a link showing the Jones says the building collapses violated the second law of thermodynamics. Nuclear devices for building demolition do exist. They were invented in the 50's as a cheaper way to demolish large buildings. There are US government documents online that describe them. Its not a far out hypothesis but many theories on how the building collapses will emerge until it is explained. That is the nature of science - you generate hypothesis until one can be proven. All we know for sure is that the official version is impossible. Stephen Jones says he has the evidence to support thermate being used at this point in time. He discounts the idea of a nuke being used as unlikely and says an energy beam isn't possible. There is a Phd engineer and several Phd physics people that talk about the same energy deficit. Hoffman has published in well respected scientific journals. I think Kimmy is probably wrong although he/she is careful not to state "facts" the way you do. The energy deficit is definetly present and this means that the collapses violate the laws of thermodynamics. A law is not often relevant until it is broken. The fact that the laws of thermodynaics are broken for the official investigation is probably why the NIST report avoids investigating the actual collapses and just leaves people to assume that they did - ie government apologists and presstitutes will fill in the spaces and NIST won't be responsible for the lies and propoganda generated by morons who argue the official version without reading about it. I'm going to go back to ignoring you. You are a blow hard that knows absolutely nothing about what he speaks.

Anybody that can do grade eight science knows how silly Riverwinds scientific explanations are. qc1765 says he/she is an engineering student so I think qc1765 has the understanding necessary to see that Riverwinds scientific explantions prove that he is both a both a fool and a liar. I would believe qc1765 until he/she makes a statement like "Thermodynamics has nothing to do with building collapses". I do give people the benefit of the doubt.

Riverwind "Thermodynamics has nothing to do with building collapses" Thermodynamics has everything to do with everything. The laws of thermodynamics are universal and if a scientific process is explained in such a way that it must violate these laws than that scientific explanation must be wrong. I've already shown that your free body force answers to what happens with the table is wrong so that leaves two. But as I said, I'm not here to explain grade eight science. For the last quote about flame and temerature I want you to stop posting your crap in 911 threads in return for an explanation asd to why its wrong. As for your Stephen Jones / Jim Hoffman comment, show me where they are wrong.