9/11 media happenings

[Jazzz]

Falling debris can demolish a spire. For a start, once the top 20 storeys started to fall, it impacted the top of the core below. There's some immediate on-axis forces right there. Then, once the collapse was underway, any failing members that buckle inwards will generate a lateral force, trasmitted by the floors and any other intermediate debris, to the core. Also, floors ripping away or being pushed in towards the core would also damage it. It's in the nature of droping things, that when they impact, they deflect and go sideways. Any number of things going sideways will be thrown around. WIth a fuck lot of energy, remember. e=mv^2 - there's a lot of mass, falling pretty quickly. Do the maths.

Well, how a continuous column can impact on itself is something I find quite interesting for one. I say that if floors were raining down collapsing each other then the trusses would be failing at the connections to the core, they would snap, and the core would hold. I can think of no way that the core is going to be torn apart. There is nothing in the NIST model to say otherwise. Maybe you, or TA, or BTL aren't bothered at all by this lack of modelling. Perhaps you can wave hands around and go 'well it's obvious it would all fail like it did'. Well in which case, when demolishing a skyscraper, there'd be no need to plant any explosives. You could just cut a few columns and then light a big fire in the middle. You'd know that you would then get a beautiful implosion with no fear that the building might either completely stay up, or lurch over sideways. But are we about to do away with explosives for CD? I don't think so.

Finally, your ordering of the statements "I believe this" therefore "I know this" as opposed to "I know this" therefore "I believe this" satifies me that this entire thread is utterly, utterly pointless. Because you work from a position of belief and faith, not reason, you will never be convinced. We have all wasted our time, and you are deluded. That really really pisses me off, because I quite like you in real life, and every time I meet you from now on, I'm going to have to fight off this rising feeling that you're a gullible moron. I'm very sorry.

Actually it's not my side that's arguing from a position of belief and faith. And you also reveal the mentality of a missionary, judging your efforts by whether I am converted or not! I think I told you you weren't going to. I don't take the same view. I'll say what I think, and whether you change your mind or not is totally your business. In some time, you'll realise that I was pretty much right about everything and you'll go - "jesus christ, of course the towers were blown up, you can see it all over the place! how could I ever have thought otherwise?". That will be far better than editor and others of course, who will simply say "I knew it was fishy all along, I never really believed the official line, but jazzz got in the way". In the meantime, you can think I'm a likeable gullible moron. Fancy a game of scrabble? chess? backgammon?

 

[editor]

Actually it's not my side that's arguing from a position of belief and faith.

Seeing as you continue to refuse to provide a remotely rational explanation as to how thousands of invisible explosives may have been invisibly installed by a team of invisible operatives using invisible wires and invisible cables, you most certainly are, chum.

 

[Jazzz]

Here's a NIST chap exposed for talking complete nonsense about the pools of molten metal at the WTC.

How obvious does this have to be folks? Are you all going to remain in some 1984 zombie unawakening? The choice is yours. As Cilla Black might say.

 

[TheArchitect]

Well, how a continuous column can impact on itself is something I find quite interesting for one. I say that if floors were raining down collapsing each other then the trusses would be failing at the connections to the core, they would snap, and the core would hold.

The core is a framed structure which relies on the action of the different members for mutual support. There is no need for the column to impact upon itself. It can quite easily impact an adjacent column which, because of the nature of the core design, will result in ongoing progressive collapse.

In any event the entire building relies on the interaction of floor, envelope, and core for support. Remove any one of these, and down come the others. Your belief - and I use the term advisedly - that the core is freestanding is based on your own failure to understand terms such as "overturning moment"

I can think of no way that the core is going to be torn apart.

Personal incredulity and a lack of any training in the field do not qualify you to make such sweeping assertions.

 

[TheArchitect]

How obvious does this have to be folks? Are you all going to remain in some 1984 zombie unawakening?

Says the man that makes up statistics such as "600%" and lies about the extent of the fires.

 

[TheArchitect]

Corrected for accuracy:

It doesn't, I confess I have great trouble following logical reasoning and analysis sometimes.

 

[Jazzz]

The impact of the nose, static discharge,...

I worked for 16 years in the Army, partly on anti-air missile systems, generally missiles and explosives DON'T make bright orange flashes. Solid rocket motors normally produce a grey or black thin smoke and explosions are usually black, big bright explosions are a hollywood fiction.

I am certainly not saying that I can positively identify whatever that is. Missile exhaust. Wire-guided bomb. Hell, some military whatzit attached to a holographic plane. But there's something going on there. A picture from another angle shows the flash clearly distinct from the nose of the plane as it enters the building.

(click for video)

source (collection of vids/stills)

 

[Jazzz]

big bright explosions are a hollywood fiction.

... like this one perhaps?

 

[editor]

... like this one perhaps?

That explosion was the result of a fuel laden plane smashing into the towers at high speed and not a missile, fool.

But let's recap on your lunatic theory.

According to you, the WTC was hit by an invisible missile launched from an invisible launcher on a pretend aircraft which then hit the towers at high speed, yes?

And if that wasn't enough, both towers were also invisibly wired with thousands of invisible explosives installed by invisible operatives which were invisibly set off by hiding invisible operatives some time later, just in case the plane laden with fuel/invisible missile combo wasn't enough to do the job.

Is that right?

Oh look Jazzz! There's a leprechaun over there!

 

[editor]

How obvious does this have to be folks? Are you all going to remain in some 1984 zombie unawakening?

I'd like you to explain the invisible explosives please. I've asked about twenty times now.

Why do you keep running away from the question?

 

[Yossarian]

In some time, you'll realise that I was pretty much right about everything and you'll go - "jesus christ, of course the towers were blown up, you can see it all over the place! how could I ever have thought otherwise?".

I get the impression you spend a lot of time fantasising about the day when you can turn around and say 'I told you so!' It ain't gonna happen....

 

[Yossarian]

I'd like you to explain the invisible explosives please. I've asked about twenty times now.

That well-respected group of intellectuals, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, has made it abundantly clear - the Twin Towers were demolished using energy-beam weapons from space.

Sure, that might sound like the stupidest thing you've ever heard in your life *now*, but the day will surely come when you'll realise they were right all along....

 

[editor]

I am certainly not saying that I can positively identify whatever that is......Hell, some military whatzit attached to a holographic plane.

Holographic planes don't exist you fucking idiot.

We've already discussed this and the only reference you could find was to a company making little panels that would only work when they were displayed under a single light source. Did you see a hovering desk lamp floating above the WTC planes, Jazzz?

Oh sorry, I forgot. You did find another reference to holographic planes. From a sci-fi fantasy manual set in the year 2012. And you believed it, so I guess we can add time travel to the amazing talents of the super-evil USG.

 

[laptop]

big bright explosions are a hollywood fiction.

See? Proof of a conspiracy to mislead us!!1!









Er, the Twin Towers were brought down by the power of Narrative Drive together with the Need For Closure In Act Three?

 

[Yossarian]

Holographic planes don't exist you fucking idiot.

And if they were to exist, wouldn't it be kind of impossible to attach 'military whatzits' to them what with them being...holographs?

 

[pk]

This is the famous CNN footage.

No it's fucking NOT the CNN footage... it's a shitty video clip hosted on letsroll911.net which could easily have been fucked around by any one of your holocaust denying fuckwitted friends.

Simply by reducing the image resolution you turn the plane into something so un-aerodynamic it would not have even been able to take off.

Would you like me to destroy one more of your "missile pod" theories again Jazzz?

Here's a 767 with a "missile pod".

Oh no, actually it's just a fairing found on all 767's. Oops!
Silly me, did some basic research on 767 aircraft...

Missile my arse. And don't talk to me about CNN tapes, I was working for CNN in 2002, as well as the BBC, I can show you dated payslips.

None of the video images at CNN had the shitty quality of the re-compressed wmv files on your "BlameTheJews.com" websites, or had been blatantly tampered with by lying nerds like you who just want to cause a stir.

Your sources are bullshit, your theories are bullshit, ergo you are a bullshitter.

Jazzz - seeing as you clearly suffer from mental ('cognitive') difficulties such poor concentration, reduced attention span, poor memory for recent events, difficulty to plan or organise your thoughts, difficulty 'finding the right words' to say, sometimes feeling disorientated... do you think you are the best proponent of these dumb conspiracy theories?

 

[MikeMcc]

... like this one perhaps?

Had to modify this to take the perjorative out of it that I initially wrote into because of the condensing rubbish that you put in that post.

Since when does a fuel/air explosion (a burning rection) compare to an HE explosion (explosive detonation). How do you think Hollywood get those nice big explosions (using fuel/air, who'd have thought it)? Why do you think they do it? Because HE explosions are visually quite disappointing.

So don't try and compare two different types of explosion, it's disingenious and easily proven as rubbish.

 

[Crispy]

Actually it's not my side that's arguing from a position of belief and faith.

You admitted exactly that when you said

I am saying "Because I believe 9/11 was an inside job, I believe there were missiles on the planes, because that's the way to make it happen"

It is impossible to have a rational argument with someone with that sort of mindset. I don't think I can carry on on this thread. It is futile and it feels like kicking a gerbil.

 

[pk]

You admitted exactly that when you said


It is impossible to have a rational argument with someone with that sort of mindset. I don't think I can carry on on this thread. It is futile and it feels like kicking a gerbil.

Kicking gerbils can be therapeutic.

 

[Structaural]

I recently discovered a site owned by some lad in the states, who calls himself Maddox. Has anyone heard of him?

He has a rather tongue in cheek, cutting view on the 9/11 conspiracies on his site.

Don't want to post the link without permission, as I may be acting improperly by doing so, but if you type Maddox in google, the first hit will be the name of the site "The best web page in the Universe" - click on that and the second piece down is about his views on 9/11 conspiracists in general.

Thought it was very funny and worth a look - for anyone who's interested.

That page is fucking class, the 'I hate Cameron Diaz' is a cracker

 

[Andy the Don]

I am certainly not saying that I can positively identify whatever that is. Missile exhaust. Wire-guided bomb. Hell, some military whatzit attached to a holographic plane. But there's something going on there. A picture from another angle shows the flash clearly distinct from the nose of the plane as it enters the building.

(click for video)

source (collection of vids/stills)

Jazz, I am not an explosives expert, but if there was an explosive device in the nose cone of the of the 767 & that explosive had ignited on impact. Would not the force of the explosion had blown the debris of the 767 away from WTC? You see the 767 entering the building leaving a 767 shape in the wall of the building the plane entered the WTC & then exploded.

 

[Crispy]

That flash could quite easily be a shedload of sparks, seeing as two chunks of metal are colliding at 100's of mph.

 

[Jazzz]

You admitted exactly that when you said


It is impossible to have a rational argument with someone with that sort of mindset. I don't think I can carry on on this thread. It is futile and it feels like kicking a gerbil.

Well if you are going to be producing logic like this, then don't complain when I expose it.

The quote you took simply referred to the question of missiles. I've never said that the missile thing is proof that 9/11 was an inside job, you've got it the wrong way around. bees asked me whether I believed there were missiles on the planes, so I told him. Do you appreciate the distinction? Do you realise that it's possible to form an opinion on the whole thing about 9/11 from other questions other than missiles?

Things like the molten steel - for instance, which I noticed NOBODY commented on?

 

[Jazzz]

Jazz, I am not an explosives expert, but if there was an explosive device in the nose cone of the of the 767 & that explosive had ignited on impact. Would not the force of the explosion had blown the debris of the 767 away from WTC? You see the 767 entering the building leaving a 767 shape in the wall of the building the plane entered the WTC & then exploded.

I don't think the idea of explosives in the nose cone helps us. Whatever provided the explosions (and yes, they had to be big, Hollywood things) exploded inside the WTC not outside or on the perimeter. And that orange flash appears distinct from the nose cone.

 

[Jazzz]

Here's that molten steel montage again for our NIST fans. Anyone like to comment? I noticed no-one commented either about the WTC impacts having the greatest seismic trace.

 

[editor]

Well if you are going to be producing logic like this, then don't complain when I expose it?

This from the deluded clown who believes in invisible explosives, invisible people, invisible missiles and holographic planes that don't even exist in this universe.

You're doing a very, very good job of reminding me why any kind of debate with you about 9/11 is akin to talking to a Creationist. You're not interested in the opinions of qualified, published experts, you don't give a fig for evidence - you're only interested in trying to twist and distort the truth to fit your conspiraloon religion.

It's all rather sad because you're clearly not lacking intelligence in other matters.

 

[editor]

Here's that molten steel montage again for our NIST fans. Anyone like to comment? I noticed no-one commented either about the WTC impacts having the greatest seismic trace.

How did they invisibly install the explosives, Jazzz?

If you keep on avoiding highly pertinent questions framed in response to your own claims, there's no point having this debate.

 

[Jazzz]

How did they invisibly install the explosives, Jazzz?

If you keep on avoiding highly pertinent questions framed in response to your own claims, there's no point having this debate.

Find one person that thinks we've ever had a productive discussion. Indeed, I don't think there is any point having this debate with you, that's why I don't bother.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

WHOA. Hang on. You're pursuing a devious debating tactic. You asked for my belief about something I cannot be sure of. I was good enough to provide you with an answer I didn't have to provide. I've shown you why I believe what I do. It's based on inductive, not deductive reasoning. I am not saying here "9/11 was an inside job because there were missiles from the planes." I am saying "Because I believe 9/11 was an inside job, I believe there were missiles on the planes, because that's the way to make it happen". That is all I need say about the missile question.

All I can say is that I hope to god you are never asked to sit on a jury.

In this one post you have shown yourself to be a complete and utter fool. Your mindset is that of a brainwashed cult follower. Nothing will convince you, nothing will sway you. You are not interested in proof, evidence or any sort of investigation. You are a sumg, self satisified egotistical idiot who cares not one iota for the truth, but merely seeks any scrap of lunacy to support your paranoid fantasy world.

And you have no idea how sorry I am to type that

 

[editor]

Find one person that thinks we've ever had a productive discussion. Indeed, I don't think there is any point having this debate with you, that's why I don't bother.

Oh, I don't know. I've enjoyed correcting many of your idiotic claims where you've displayed your undying ability to never check your sources thoroughly or do any research.

The sad thing is you refuse to learn from your blunders and go straight back to these idiotic websites to regurgitate their next bout of guff for the terminally gullible. That time you quoted from an 'army manual' to back up your bmnkers yarn about holographic planes was priceless - you hadn't bothered to check that it was in fact a piece of science fiction writing set in the year 2012.

And then there was your claims about this company producing holographic planes - and it turned out they were little panels for indoor use!

And the really sad thing is that here you are again, pumping out the same clueless shit about holographic planes. Your refusal to learn anything is quite depressing.