Justice Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Looks like the top 20 or so floors are about to fall off the side of the building so why did these floors turn to dust before they hit the ground and if all that weight was removed from the floors that were on fire then why did the building come down as it did. My guess is the explosives blew it up in mid air because you would not want anyone to find a load of TNT in the rubble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzMosiz Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 I reckon its cos a big plane, fully fueled hit it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbird900 Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Justice, the image would not open. Please re-send. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted July 28, 2006 Author Share Posted July 28, 2006 The link to the image was working but i think some site now block some image if it has been linked to from another site in order to reduce server load i will see if i can find another link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkG Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Sigh. The top of the tower tilted because the walls on the floor with the fire were sagging inwards. The floors with the fires finally lost too much strength and the upper floors collapsed into them until the forces caused by the collapse were too much for the lower floors to take, then the whole tower came down. If you actually understood physics, this would not be difficult to understand, and is very obvious from the videos. But like most conspiracy theorists, you apparently just want to flaunt your ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonewer Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Obviously the twin towers were demolished by a CIA assassin on the grassy knoll................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest donall Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 Obviously the twin towers were demolished by a CIA assassin on the grassy knoll................ The structure of the Twin Towers was that the building was held up by internal pillars. This means that everyone can have a nice view on the outside. As far as toppling over goes - the twin towers collapsed upon themselves. If you look at a demolition of tower blocks or towers etc... they don't fall over, rather just fall down. TO fall over there would need to be some force pushing it that way. But i don' t know about physics or the tensile strength of reinforced concrete - so someone else can comment on this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted July 31, 2006 Author Share Posted July 31, 2006 Sigh. The top of the tower tilted because the walls on the floor with the fire were sagging inwards. The floors with the fires finally lost too much strength and the upper floors collapsed into them until the forces caused by the collapse were too much for the lower floors to take, then the whole tower came down. If you actually understood physics, this would not be difficult to understand, and is very obvious from the videos. But like most conspiracy theorists, you apparently just want to flaunt your ignorance. As you can see the top 20 floors are going over the edge and yet long before they hit the ground it had all turned to dust in mid air so I can only speculate that you are questioning Newton’s law of inertia and somehow the floors swung back into place using forces unknown. In any case the floors falling off would put paid to the pancake theory as described in the official story since a lot of weight would had been removed above the fire or do you think the picture is a fake ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilf Posted July 31, 2006 Share Posted July 31, 2006 If you look at a demolition of tower blocks or towers etc... they don't fall over, rather just fall down. TO fall over there would need to be some force pushing it that way. Err.. no, they fall that way because the explosives have been set so they fall in that manner. Do you think there was somebody pushing this for it to fall over in that way.... http://www.catalyst.org.uk/graphics/jpegs/web_3_1.jpg Not that I'm connecting this to the Twin Towers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crystal ball Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 All the evidence suggests the twin towers were brought down by controlled demolition indicating an inside job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonewer Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 All the evidence suggests the twin towers were brought down by controlled demolition indicating an inside job. I hope you are wearing your tinfoil helmet! You know the CIA guys in their black helicopters can control your mind if your arent wearing it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crystal ball Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 Thank god for the internet that the masses can wake up from their deep sleep. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1519312457137943386 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
music man Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 Thank god for the internet that the masses can wake up from their deep sleep. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1519312457137943386 Definitely for a home P.C. and I believe $10K this is a masterpiece and if I remember rightly it has The Matrix Soundtrack from the Crystal Method. Not that anyone is bothered. It's a shame 'they' will do anything to make the WTC towers and Buildiong 7 crash but not.............. Yes there will be a housing crash and they've orchestrated that as well - welcome to the beautiful World of Conspiracies. For anyone who doesn't believe the WTC was an inside job watch the vid and post here. I Dares Ya! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonewer Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 Oh my good God! You lot are actually being serious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest degreeofcaution Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 I left uni with an MSc and went straight into a warehouse humping bloody great rolls of fabric. Took two years before I got a "graduate job". One of them bloody great rolls of fabric didnt land on your head for you to deny reality exists by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonewer Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 One of them bloody great rolls of fabric didnt land on your head for you to deny reality exists by any chance? I'm sorry. It might just be that bloody great roll of fabric, but I cant make head or tail of what you just said. Are you trying to say that I must be brain damaged to think that the twin towers were NOT brought down by the CIA/Illuminati/Martians or were you trying to say the opposite? Have a look here: http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html It pretty well debunks the whole movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Sacks Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 Have a look here: http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html It pretty well debunks the whole movie. Hardly, if anything it amplifies the ambiguity of the 911 commission. It is obviously written by a person in total denial, desperately trying to keep hold to their perceived reality, a bit like you, which is why they're getting angry over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest degreeofcaution Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 Click on the above attatchment and ask yourself how did cave dwelling terrorists do this ? All the evidence suggests the WTC buildings were brought down by controlled demolition indicating an inside job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted August 3, 2006 Author Share Posted August 3, 2006 I'm sorry. It might just be that bloody great roll of fabric, but I cant make head or tail of what you just said. Are you trying to say that I must be brain damaged to think that the twin towers were NOT brought down by the CIA/Illuminati/Martians or were you trying to say the opposite? Have a look here: http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html It pretty well debunks the whole movie. yes i looked at the site and will deal with his first point. I put this document together for several reasons:1. To promote understanding of the facts about the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and to discourage relying on rumor and conjecture when searching for the "truth." Yes we all want the truth so why has the pentagon not released any images from the hundreds of CCTV’s positioned around the pentagon that actually shows a plane and why is nothing known about WT7 plus a millions other questions that were not answered by the official story. He says "facts" well facts are you can poor all the kerosene in the world onto a lump of steel and it will not melt and yet molten steel was seen to be dripping from the towers and was in fact so hot it was several days before the metal solidified. this guy is a joke and i'm sure you could find better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonewer Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 yes i looked at the site and will deal with his first point. Yes we all want the truth so why has the pentagon not released any images from the hundreds of CCTV’s positioned around the pentagon that actually shows a plane and why is nothing known about WT7 plus a millions other questions that were not answered by the official story. He says "facts" well facts are you can poor all the kerosene in the world onto a lump of steel and it will not melt and yet molten steel was seen to be dripping from the towers and was in fact so hot it was several days before the metal solidified. this guy is a joke and i'm sure you could find better. Oh well. Just google "Pentagon CCTV" and see what you get. You are well behind the curve- specially for a conspiracy theorist. hmmmm... steel staying molten for several days? Are you sure? Think about what you are saying. Was kerosene the only thing that was burning in the WTC? or were other things burning too? All of this is adequately addressed in the link I provided. Try reading it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbird900 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 Jonewer, I did what you suggested with Google. I have still not seen one picture of that enormous aircraft hitting the Pentagon. Perhaps you should take your own advice and see all the Google sites. Most of them seriously question why no CCTV footage has been released showing the impact of the plane hitting the Pentagon wall. Perhaps you should ask yourself why, instead of criticising everyone who asks the question. Where are the pictures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonewer Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 Hardly, if anything it amplifies the ambiguity of the 911 commission. It is obviously written by a person in total denial, desperately trying to keep hold to their perceived reality, a bit like you, which is why they're getting angry over it. Thats a nice bunch of statements you have there. Care to substantiate any of them? Jonewer, I did what you suggested with Google. I have still not seen one picture of that enormous aircraft hitting the Pentagon. Perhaps you should take your own advice and see all the Google sites. Most of them seriously question why no CCTV footage has been released showing the impact of the plane hitting the Pentagon wall. Perhaps you should ask yourself why, instead of criticising everyone who asks the question. Where are the pictures? http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/03/07/gen....ures/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crystal ball Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 Thats a nice bunch of statements you have there. Care to substantiate any of them? http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/03/07/gen....ures/index.html THE SECRET OF NON SEQUITURS Non sequitur is a Latin word meaning "it does not follow". Because the word is dead-language Latin, its meaning is stable, immutable -- unable to be changed or twisted . Webster's 9th Collegiate Dictionary definition of non sequitur is, "a statement that does not follow logically from anything previously said" Non Sequiturs are cleverly used by politicians and other persons who wish to distract people from reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbird900 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 Jonewer. Try reading my post again and again till you understand it. The link to the CNN archives shows a fireball. It does not show a plane. Do you have x ray vision and can see something the rest of us cannot? This is getting rather boring. Show me one picture of any plane hitting the Pentagon. I'm waiting ............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonewer Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 Jonewer. Try reading my post again and again till you understand it. The link to the CNN archives shows a fireball. It does not show a plane. Do you have x ray vision and can see something the rest of us cannot? This is getting rather boring. Show me one picture of any plane hitting the Pentagon. I'm waiting ............ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAxyhbMotKM I assume that what you want is some high-speed cinematic camera footage? Doesnt exist. Security cameras only capture a frame or two every few seconds and the plane was moving close to 800 feet per second. Nevertheless, you can see the plane as a silver blur just before the fireball. EDIT: The silver blur is actually smoke coming from the damaged engine. Have a look at this link: It explains what you see on the CCTV THE SECRET OF NON SEQUITURS Non sequitur is a Latin word meaning "it does not follow". Because the word is dead-language Latin, its meaning is stable, immutable -- unable to be changed or twisted . Webster's 9th Collegiate Dictionary definition of non sequitur is, "a statement that does not follow logically from anything previously said" Non Sequiturs are cleverly used by politicians and other persons who wish to distract people from reality. Erm... I asked you to substantiate your statements. Non sequitur right back to you with knobs on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.