100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Get Destroyed | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Building 7 was heavily damaged when Tower 1 collapsed. It was debris from Tower 1 which ignited the fires in Building 7. The damage from debris weakened perimeter support for several floors. The heat from the fires - which were present in roughly half the floors of Building 7 due to the extensive debris damage - in conjunction with the reduced support caused a shift in lateral support near one of the core supports. Eventually because of weight, a ripple effect went through the building as several floors collapsed. A bulge was even noted on the outside of the building, indicating excessive stress on perimeter supports, which prompted the pull out of rescue personnel. When several lower floors began collapsing, it weakened the core support placing further load on the perimeter which no longer had lateral support. Without sufficient core or lateral support, the perimeter could not handle the additional weight, causing the building to collapse.
It all seems logical to me. In fact, because of damage within the area already, there was not enough water pressure for cooling of the steel. Therefore, the structural steel was subject to the full effects of high heat. As far as eutectic steel in Building 7, I believe it was introduced to the building via the debris from Tower 1. Jet fuel contains sulphur, and the plane was constructed mostly of aluminum. Chemical processes triggered by the fires could have transformed these two elements into compounds, possibly even in gas form, which might have triggered a eutectic reaction in the steel of Towers 1 & 2. If so, this is just one more reason why Building 7 stood for so much longer than the Twin Towers after being damaged. Weight (almost double the floors above impact) plus a eutectic reaction could also explain why Tower 2 fell first, even though it had been struck second. So far, there is no credible evidence of thermite being present in debris from Building 7. It is speculation based on circumstantial claims rather than physical evidence. When this was pointed out, they point to photos, which when analyzed, prove nothing. If anything, most photos demonstrate that the presence of thermite is more unlikely. The photo which is most often brought forth is of some form of red substance scattered throughout what appears to be debris. However, there is nothing in the photo to show us that the debris is in fact from the WTC. It is too closely cropped to allow us to see the surrounding area. No people - including clean up crews - are shown in the picture. Furthermore, the substance is such a bright color despite smoke, dust, and weather that it calls into question how there is no discoloration. The unfortunate truth is that many of these websites get their information from each other, allowing false information to spread in a viral manner. Think about it. Why does there need to be so many 9/11 "truth" or "conspiracy" sites? Why can't just a few links be passed on so that the information can be discussed and cross-analyzed by those who visit the site? To me, the answer is obvious: to drown out the real truth. It's a disinformation campaign meant to overwhelm and devour the websites that do not agree with the 9/11 Truther sites. They do not wish to entertain opposing evidence or views or facts. This makes it clear to me that whoever began the viral trend has a dishonest agenda. So the question becomes, "what do they hope to achieve with this?" While everyone is pointing at the government, no one is looking at the person (or people) who roused the hornet's nest in the first place. If you want to know the truth, go back to the beginning. See how this all began and who was involved. So, what I see is, the people and web sites that are spurring so many to seek out the truth are the very same ones who are trying to hide and cover up the truth. Why would the government do that if they had something to hide? And before someone says the government isn't behind the Truther sites....DUH! That's not my point. Someone has begun a ruthless campaign to discredit the government concerning 9/11 when in fact the government had nothing to hide concerning the events of 9/11. Who? And why? Those are the questions we should be asking. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Building 7 was heavily damaged when Tower 1 collapsed. It was debris from Tower 1 which ignited the fires in Building 7. The damage from debris weakened perimeter support for several floors. The heat from the fires - which were present in roughly half the floors of Building 7 due to the extensive debris damage - in conjunction with the reduced support caused a shift in lateral support near one of the core supports. Eventually because of weight, a ripple effect went through the building as several floors collapsed. A bulge was even noted on the outside of the building, indicating excessive stress on perimeter supports, which prompted the pull out of rescue personnel. When several lower floors began collapsing, it weakened the core support placing further load on the perimeter which no longer had lateral support. Without sufficient core or lateral support, the perimeter could not handle the additional weight, causing the building to collapse. It all seems logical to me. In fact, because of damage within the area already, there was not enough water pressure for cooling of the steel. Therefore, the structural steel was subject to the full effects of high heat. As far as eutectic steel in Building 7, I believe it was introduced to the building via the debris from Tower 1. Jet fuel contains sulphur, and the plane was constructed mostly of aluminum. Chemical processes triggered by the fires could have transformed these two elements into compounds, possibly even in gas form, which might have triggered a eutectic reaction in the steel of Towers 1 & 2. If so, this is just one more reason why Building 7 stood for so much longer than the Twin Towers after being damaged. Weight (almost double the floors above impact) plus a eutectic reaction could also explain why Tower 2 fell first, even though it had been struck second. So far, there is no credible evidence of thermite being present in debris from Building 7. It is speculation based on circumstantial claims rather than physical evidence. When this was pointed out, they point to photos, which when analyzed, prove nothing. If anything, most photos demonstrate that the presence of thermite is more unlikely. The photo which is most often brought forth is of some form of red substance scattered throughout what appears to be debris. However, there is nothing in the photo to show us that the debris is in fact from the WTC. It is too closely cropped to allow us to see the surrounding area. No people - including clean up crews - are shown in the picture. Furthermore, the substance is such a bright color despite smoke, dust, and weather that it calls into question how there is no discoloration. The unfortunate truth is that many of these websites get their information from each other, allowing false information to spread in a viral manner. Think about it. Why does there need to be so many 9/11 "truth" or "conspiracy" sites? Why can't just a few links be passed on so that the information can be discussed and cross-analyzed by those who visit the site? To me, the answer is obvious: to drown out the real truth. It's a disinformation campaign meant to overwhelm and devour the websites that do not agree with the 9/11 Truther sites. They do not wish to entertain opposing evidence or views or facts. This makes it clear to me that whoever began the viral trend has a dishonest agenda. So the question becomes, "what do they hope to achieve with this?" While everyone is pointing at the government, no one is looking at the person (or people) who roused the hornet's nest in the first place. If you want to know the truth, go back to the beginning. See how this all began and who was involved. So, what I see is, the people and web sites that are spurring so many to seek out the truth are the very same ones who are trying to hide and cover up the truth. Why would the government do that if they had something to hide? And before someone says the government isn't behind the Truther sites....DUH! That's not my point. Someone has begun a ruthless campaign to discredit the government concerning 9/11 when in fact the government had nothing to hide concerning the events of 9/11. Who? And why? Those are the questions we should be asking. so say a handful of terrorist planed this and executed it with stealth like precision then we should immediately cut all funds and disband the nsa cia homeland security and fbi because there useless and as far as our armed forces what good can they do they cant stop siht so we might as well bring them all back now the Council on Foreign Relations should be disbanded and outlawed too the patriot act cant save us either it a worthless piece of paper and should be discarded like toilet paper it hurts us more than them we have already lost the war like vietnam the terrorist dont fluoridate their water so they are much smarter than us way more troops and civilians have been killed than during 911 also the us govenment should be cut in half. not services to the people just the freeloaders in charge this would save money. as a matter of fact lets start over in the next couple of years and replace all of them because they have failed us lets face it our countrys about to collapse like the twin (three) towers lets pull out and cut our losses before its too late because even though these people over there dont have siht they have somehow outsmarted our government and outsmarted the whole world |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am placing you into a category. You will have to guess which one i am placing you into. Scientific Poll: 84% Reject Official 9/11 Story Only 16% now believe official fable according to New York Times/CBS News poll According to the new New York Times/CBS News poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks: "Do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or are they mostly lying? Telling the truth 16% Hiding something 53% Mostly lying 28% Not sure 3%" The 84% figure mirrors other recent polls on the same issue. A Canadian Poll put the figure at 85%. A CNN poll had the figure at 89%. Over 80% supported the stance of Charlie Sheen when he went public with his opinions on 9/11 as an inside job. A recent CNN poll found that the percentage of Americans who blame the Bush administration for the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington rose from almost a third to almost half over the past four years. This latest poll shows that that figure has again risen exponentially and now stands at well over three quarters of the population. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3553 No you are not the majority. Read that site again. It says mostly telling the truth but hiding something when the talked about what they asked when people answered "hiding something". that would mean that they don't believe in the conspiracy just that there is some info left out. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Building 7 was heavily damaged when Tower 1 collapsed. It was debris from Tower 1 which ignited the fires in Building 7. The damage from debris weakened perimeter support for several floors. The heat from the fires - which were present in roughly half the floors of Building 7 due to the extensive debris damage - in conjunction with the reduced support caused a shift in lateral support near one of the core supports. Eventually because of weight, a ripple effect went through the building as several floors collapsed. A bulge was even noted on the outside of the building, indicating excessive stress on perimeter supports, which prompted the pull out of rescue personnel. When several lower floors began collapsing, it weakened the core support placing further load on the perimeter which no longer had lateral support. Without sufficient core or lateral support, the perimeter could not handle the additional weight, causing the building to collapse. It all seems logical to me. In fact, because of damage within the area already, there was not enough water pressure for cooling of the steel. Therefore, the structural steel was subject to the full effects of high heat. As far as eutectic steel in Building 7, I believe it was introduced to the building via the debris from Tower 1. Jet fuel contains sulphur, and the plane was constructed mostly of aluminum. Chemical processes triggered by the fires could have transformed these two elements into compounds, possibly even in gas form, which might have triggered a eutectic reaction in the steel of Towers 1 & 2. If so, this is just one more reason why Building 7 stood for so much longer than the Twin Towers after being damaged. Weight (almost double the floors above impact) plus a eutectic reaction could also explain why Tower 2 fell first, even though it had been struck second. So far, there is no credible evidence of thermite being present in debris from Building 7. It is speculation based on circumstantial claims rather than physical evidence. When this was pointed out, they point to photos, which when analyzed, prove nothing. If anything, most photos demonstrate that the presence of thermite is more unlikely. The photo which is most often brought forth is of some form of red substance scattered throughout what appears to be debris. However, there is nothing in the photo to show us that the debris is in fact from the WTC. It is too closely cropped to allow us to see the surrounding area. No people - including clean up crews - are shown in the picture. Furthermore, the substance is such a bright color despite smoke, dust, and weather that it calls into question how there is no discoloration. The unfortunate truth is that many of these websites get their information from each other, allowing false information to spread in a viral manner. Think about it. Why does there need to be so many 9/11 "truth" or "conspiracy" sites? Why can't just a few links be passed on so that the information can be discussed and cross-analyzed by those who visit the site? To me, the answer is obvious: to drown out the real truth. It's a disinformation campaign meant to overwhelm and devour the websites that do not agree with the 9/11 Truther sites. They do not wish to entertain opposing evidence or views or facts. This makes it clear to me that whoever began the viral trend has a dishonest agenda. So the question becomes, "what do they hope to achieve with this?" While everyone is pointing at the government, no one is looking at the person (or people) who roused the hornet's nest in the first place. If you want to know the truth, go back to the beginning. See how this all began and who was involved. So, what I see is, the people and web sites that are spurring so many to seek out the truth are the very same ones who are trying to hide and cover up the truth. Why would the government do that if they had something to hide? And before someone says the government isn't behind the Truther sites....DUH! That's not my point. Someone has begun a ruthless campaign to discredit the government concerning 9/11 when in fact the government had nothing to hide concerning the events of 9/11. Who? And why? Those are the questions we should be asking. so say a handful of terrorist planed this and executed it with stealth like precision then we should immediately cut all funds and disband the nsa cia homeland security and fbi because there useless and as far as our armed forces what good can they do they cant stop siht so we might as well bring them all back now the Council on Foreign Relations should be disbanded and outlawed too the patriot act cant save us either it a worthless piece of paper and should be discarded like toilet paper it hurts us more than them we have already lost the war like vietnam the terrorist dont fluoridate their water so they are much smarter than us way more troops and civilians have been killed than during 911 also the us govenment should be cut in half. not services to the people just the freeloaders in charge this would save money. as a matter of fact lets start over in the next couple of years and replace all of them because they have failed us lets face it our countrys about to collapse like the twin (three) towers lets pull out and cut our losses before its too late because even though these people over there dont have siht they have somehow outsmarted our government and outsmarted the whole world |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yes but you know that would be like the fox explain what happened to
the chickens they said that we went to the moon but the film got lost/destroyed so they had to recreate it in a studio we could argue about this forever but lets figure out the outcome we have hardly any rights left we are in a never ending (fake)war we have lost our freedoms we are under constant surveillance our country is about to collapse our government is going hogwild with our money there are over 1000 fema death camps now the ship is sinking and you are dead weight its time to stop the war on terrorism and start the war on satanism the real enemy of the world |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Building 7 was heavily damaged when Tower 1 collapsed. It was debris from Tower 1 which ignited the fires in Building 7. The damage from debris weakened perimeter support for several floors. The heat from the fires - which were present in roughly half the floors of Building 7 due to the extensive debris damage - in conjunction with the reduced support caused a shift in lateral support near one of the core supports. Eventually because of weight, a ripple effect went through the building as several floors collapsed. A bulge was even noted on the outside of the building, indicating excessive stress on perimeter supports, which prompted the pull out of rescue personnel. When several lower floors began collapsing, it weakened the core support placing further load on the perimeter which no longer had lateral support. Without sufficient core or lateral support, the perimeter could not handle the additional weight, causing the building to collapse. It all seems logical to me. In fact, because of damage within the area already, there was not enough water pressure for cooling of the steel. Therefore, the structural steel was subject to the full effects of high heat. As far as eutectic steel in Building 7, I believe it was introduced to the building via the debris from Tower 1. Jet fuel contains sulphur, and the plane was constructed mostly of aluminum. Chemical processes triggered by the fires could have transformed these two elements into compounds, possibly even in gas form, which might have triggered a eutectic reaction in the steel of Towers 1 & 2. If so, this is just one more reason why Building 7 stood for so much longer than the Twin Towers after being damaged. Weight (almost double the floors above impact) plus a eutectic reaction could also explain why Tower 2 fell first, even though it had been struck second. So far, there is no credible evidence of thermite being present in debris from Building 7. It is speculation based on circumstantial claims rather than physical evidence. When this was pointed out, they point to photos, which when analyzed, prove nothing. If anything, most photos demonstrate that the presence of thermite is more unlikely. The photo which is most often brought forth is of some form of red substance scattered throughout what appears to be debris. However, there is nothing in the photo to show us that the debris is in fact from the WTC. It is too closely cropped to allow us to see the surrounding area. No people - including clean up crews - are shown in the picture. Furthermore, the substance is such a bright color despite smoke, dust, and weather that it calls into question how there is no discoloration. The unfortunate truth is that many of these websites get their information from each other, allowing false information to spread in a viral manner. Think about it. Why does there need to be so many 9/11 "truth" or "conspiracy" sites? Why can't just a few links be passed on so that the information can be discussed and cross-analyzed by those who visit the site? To me, the answer is obvious: to drown out the real truth. It's a disinformation campaign meant to overwhelm and devour the websites that do not agree with the 9/11 Truther sites. They do not wish to entertain opposing evidence or views or facts. This makes it clear to me that whoever began the viral trend has a dishonest agenda. So the question becomes, "what do they hope to achieve with this?" While everyone is pointing at the government, no one is looking at the person (or people) who roused the hornet's nest in the first place. If you want to know the truth, go back to the beginning. See how this all began and who was involved. So, what I see is, the people and web sites that are spurring so many to seek out the truth are the very same ones who are trying to hide and cover up the truth. Why would the government do that if they had something to hide? And before someone says the government isn't behind the Truther sites....DUH! That's not my point. Someone has begun a ruthless campaign to discredit the government concerning 9/11 when in fact the government had nothing to hide concerning the events of 9/11. Who? And why? Those are the questions we should be asking. so say a handful of terrorist planed this and executed it with stealth like precision then we should immediately cut all funds and disband the nsa cia homeland security and fbi because there useless and as far as our armed forces what good can they do they cant stop siht so we might as well bring them all back now the Council on Foreign Relations should be disbanded and outlawed too the patriot act cant save us either it a worthless piece of paper and should be discarded like toilet paper it hurts us more than them we have already lost the war like vietnam the terrorist dont fluoridate their water so they are much smarter than us way more troops and civilians have been killed than during 911 also the us govenment should be cut in half. not services to the people just the freeloaders in charge this would save money. as a matter of fact lets start over in the next couple of years and replace all of them because they have failed us lets face it our countrys about to collapse like the twin (three) towers lets pull out and cut our losses before its too late because even though these people over there dont have siht they have somehow outsmarted our government and outsmarted the whole world So your answer, if you are wrong about a government/elitist conspiracy is to preach anarchy? To have a defeatist attitude? And then you justify it by bringing your theories in to justify it? Your logic astounds me. You tell us that even if you're wrong, you are right. I was about to point out all the personal dualities you have shown throughout your posts, but then I realized you wouldn't listen. If anything, you would be offended because you refuse to acknowledge that you might be wrong....that maybe the rest of us aren't all "dumbed down" by fluoride. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Building 7 was heavily damaged when Tower 1 collapsed. It was debris from Tower 1 which ignited the fires in Building 7. The damage from debris weakened perimeter support for several floors. The heat from the fires - which were present in roughly half the floors of Building 7 due to the extensive debris damage - in conjunction with the reduced support caused a shift in lateral support near one of the core supports. Eventually because of weight, a ripple effect went through the building as several floors collapsed. A bulge was even noted on the outside of the building, indicating excessive stress on perimeter supports, which prompted the pull out of rescue personnel. When several lower floors began collapsing, it weakened the core support placing further load on the perimeter which no longer had lateral support. Without sufficient core or lateral support, the perimeter could not handle the additional weight, causing the building to collapse. It all seems logical to me. In fact, because of damage within the area already, there was not enough water pressure for cooling of the steel. Therefore, the structural steel was subject to the full effects of high heat. As far as eutectic steel in Building 7, I believe it was introduced to the building via the debris from Tower 1. Jet fuel contains sulphur, and the plane was constructed mostly of aluminum. Chemical processes triggered by the fires could have transformed these two elements into compounds, possibly even in gas form, which might have triggered a eutectic reaction in the steel of Towers 1 & 2. If so, this is just one more reason why Building 7 stood for so much longer than the Twin Towers after being damaged. Weight (almost double the floors above impact) plus a eutectic reaction could also explain why Tower 2 fell first, even though it had been struck second. So far, there is no credible evidence of thermite being present in debris from Building 7. It is speculation based on circumstantial claims rather than physical evidence. When this was pointed out, they point to photos, which when analyzed, prove nothing. If anything, most photos demonstrate that the presence of thermite is more unlikely. The photo which is most often brought forth is of some form of red substance scattered throughout what appears to be debris. However, there is nothing in the photo to show us that the debris is in fact from the WTC. It is too closely cropped to allow us to see the surrounding area. No people - including clean up crews - are shown in the picture. Furthermore, the substance is such a bright color despite smoke, dust, and weather that it calls into question how there is no discoloration. The unfortunate truth is that many of these websites get their information from each other, allowing false information to spread in a viral manner. Think about it. Why does there need to be so many 9/11 "truth" or "conspiracy" sites? Why can't just a few links be passed on so that the information can be discussed and cross-analyzed by those who visit the site? To me, the answer is obvious: to drown out the real truth. It's a disinformation campaign meant to overwhelm and devour the websites that do not agree with the 9/11 Truther sites. They do not wish to entertain opposing evidence or views or facts. This makes it clear to me that whoever began the viral trend has a dishonest agenda. So the question becomes, "what do they hope to achieve with this?" While everyone is pointing at the government, no one is looking at the person (or people) who roused the hornet's nest in the first place. If you want to know the truth, go back to the beginning. See how this all began and who was involved. So, what I see is, the people and web sites that are spurring so many to seek out the truth are the very same ones who are trying to hide and cover up the truth. Why would the government do that if they had something to hide? And before someone says the government isn't behind the Truther sites....DUH! That's not my point. Someone has begun a ruthless campaign to discredit the government concerning 9/11 when in fact the government had nothing to hide concerning the events of 9/11. Who? And why? Those are the questions we should be asking. And no one was held accountable for anything, the failures to stop it, the failures to properly investigate it and the failure in policy that allowed the powers that be to start war after war bankrupting our country and makeing our so called democracy a sick joke. ACCOUNTABLE AND ACCOUNTED FOR 5-1-2011 RIP OBL  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
volant7
on
Sat 08/27/11 01:08 PM
|
|
Building 7 was heavily damaged when Tower 1 collapsed. It was debris from Tower 1 which ignited the fires in Building 7. The damage from debris weakened perimeter support for several floors. The heat from the fires - which were present in roughly half the floors of Building 7 due to the extensive debris damage - in conjunction with the reduced support caused a shift in lateral support near one of the core supports. Eventually because of weight, a ripple effect went through the building as several floors collapsed. A bulge was even noted on the outside of the building, indicating excessive stress on perimeter supports, which prompted the pull out of rescue personnel. When several lower floors began collapsing, it weakened the core support placing further load on the perimeter which no longer had lateral support. Without sufficient core or lateral support, the perimeter could not handle the additional weight, causing the building to collapse. It all seems logical to me. In fact, because of damage within the area already, there was not enough water pressure for cooling of the steel. Therefore, the structural steel was subject to the full effects of high heat. As far as eutectic steel in Building 7, I believe it was introduced to the building via the debris from Tower 1. Jet fuel contains sulphur, and the plane was constructed mostly of aluminum. Chemical processes triggered by the fires could have transformed these two elements into compounds, possibly even in gas form, which might have triggered a eutectic reaction in the steel of Towers 1 & 2. If so, this is just one more reason why Building 7 stood for so much longer than the Twin Towers after being damaged. Weight (almost double the floors above impact) plus a eutectic reaction could also explain why Tower 2 fell first, even though it had been struck second. So far, there is no credible evidence of thermite being present in debris from Building 7. It is speculation based on circumstantial claims rather than physical evidence. When this was pointed out, they point to photos, which when analyzed, prove nothing. If anything, most photos demonstrate that the presence of thermite is more unlikely. The photo which is most often brought forth is of some form of red substance scattered throughout what appears to be debris. However, there is nothing in the photo to show us that the debris is in fact from the WTC. It is too closely cropped to allow us to see the surrounding area. No people - including clean up crews - are shown in the picture. Furthermore, the substance is such a bright color despite smoke, dust, and weather that it calls into question how there is no discoloration. The unfortunate truth is that many of these websites get their information from each other, allowing false information to spread in a viral manner. Think about it. Why does there need to be so many 9/11 "truth" or "conspiracy" sites? Why can't just a few links be passed on so that the information can be discussed and cross-analyzed by those who visit the site? To me, the answer is obvious: to drown out the real truth. It's a disinformation campaign meant to overwhelm and devour the websites that do not agree with the 9/11 Truther sites. They do not wish to entertain opposing evidence or views or facts. This makes it clear to me that whoever began the viral trend has a dishonest agenda. So the question becomes, "what do they hope to achieve with this?" While everyone is pointing at the government, no one is looking at the person (or people) who roused the hornet's nest in the first place. If you want to know the truth, go back to the beginning. See how this all began and who was involved. So, what I see is, the people and web sites that are spurring so many to seek out the truth are the very same ones who are trying to hide and cover up the truth. Why would the government do that if they had something to hide? And before someone says the government isn't behind the Truther sites....DUH! That's not my point. Someone has begun a ruthless campaign to discredit the government concerning 9/11 when in fact the government had nothing to hide concerning the events of 9/11. Who? And why? Those are the questions we should be asking. And no one was held accountable for anything, the failures to stop it, the failures to properly investigate it and the failure in policy that allowed the powers that be to start war after war bankrupting our country and makeing our so called democracy a sick joke. ACCOUNTABLE AND ACCOUNTED FOR 5-1-2011 RIP OBL
happy illuminati day wtf may 1st 1776 sorry i belong to the old world order |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh my god I was so wrong. I was out splitting fire wood and stacking it with an occasional ciggerette and politics break when I decided to fire up the grill and make some brauts.
Well there I was happily multi tasking when my grill suddenly collapsed into a pile of twisted and moletn metal. It fell at near free fall speed as if it had been a demolision. I wouldnt had believed it possible unless I had seen it myself. I was so wrong about 911 I am man enough to admit when I am wrong though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FEMA deathcamps? Really? Where might those be?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh my god I was so wrong. I was out splitting fire wood and stacking it with an occasional ciggerette and politics break when I decided to fire up the grill and make some brauts. Well there I was happily multi tasking when my grill suddenly collapsed into a pile of twisted and moletn metal. It fell at near free fall speed as if it had been a demolision. I wouldnt had believed it possible unless I had seen it myself. I was so wrong about 911 I am man enough to admit when I am wrong though.
WTC didnt fall like a demolition silly man. Please explain how a collapse should happen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
actionlynx
on
Sat 08/27/11 02:28 PM
|
|
Oh my god I was so wrong. I was out splitting fire wood and stacking it with an occasional ciggerette and politics break when I decided to fire up the grill and make some brauts. Well there I was happily multi tasking when my grill suddenly collapsed into a pile of twisted and moletn metal. It fell at near free fall speed as if it had been a demolision. I wouldnt had believed it possible unless I had seen it myself. I was so wrong about 911 I am man enough to admit when I am wrong though.
You've obviously never worked as a grill cook in a restaurant. Ever see what happens to the parts of a grill when carbon is allowed to build up? When the gas jets get built up with carbon, the flame burns taller, brighter, and hotter. So hot that the steel begins to weaken. It warps. It cracks. Even in a grill, the steel can lose its strength. I've had to clean many a grill, and I've even had to replace all the internal parts myself. After all, I was a sous chef. And in a eutetic reaction, steel WILL melt under the conditions present in the twin towers. But none of us ever claimed the steel melted. In fact, I never saw a video of molten metal flowing from the towers. I never heard any reports about it either. The first I heard of it was from 9/11 Truther websites. Even now, I have a very difficult time finding photos or videos of this from anywhere but Truther sites. I want to see the original source pictures, not the edited garbage they want to show me. But I can't find them. So, I tend to think those pictures may be bogus. Even if they are for real, there is still the possibility that a eutectic reaction did happen within both towers. So, you keep harping on the "steel won't melt" argument. Half these sites claim 2000 degrees Celsius is required to melt steel, which is false. Two percent carbon steel will be completely molten at a little over 1300 degree Celsius, which is about 2400 degree Fahrenheit. These so-called experts keep using Fahrenheit temperatures but call them Celsius. They need to get their facts straight. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh my god I was so wrong. I was out splitting fire wood and stacking it with an occasional ciggerette and politics break when I decided to fire up the grill and make some brauts. Well there I was happily multi tasking when my grill suddenly collapsed into a pile of twisted and moletn metal. It fell at near free fall speed as if it had been a demolision. I wouldnt had believed it possible unless I had seen it myself. I was so wrong about 911 I am man enough to admit when I am wrong though.
WTC didnt fall like a demolition silly man. Please explain how a collapse should happen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh my god I was so wrong. I was out splitting fire wood and stacking it with an occasional ciggerette and politics break when I decided to fire up the grill and make some brauts. Well there I was happily multi tasking when my grill suddenly collapsed into a pile of twisted and moletn metal. It fell at near free fall speed as if it had been a demolision. I wouldnt had believed it possible unless I had seen it myself. I was so wrong about 911 I am man enough to admit when I am wrong though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh my god I was so wrong. I was out splitting fire wood and stacking it with an occasional ciggerette and politics break when I decided to fire up the grill and make some brauts. Well there I was happily multi tasking when my grill suddenly collapsed into a pile of twisted and moletn metal. It fell at near free fall speed as if it had been a demolision. I wouldnt had believed it possible unless I had seen it myself. I was so wrong about 911 I am man enough to admit when I am wrong though.
WTC didnt fall like a demolition silly man. Please explain how a collapse should happen. Yes completely ignore what I say and don't give an answer or counter argument. That makes you sound so intelligent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After doing some research, the molten metal that was claimed to fall from Tower 2 was apparently aluminum. Truthers have made the claims that it was molten steel from thermite, but analysis has noted that it lacked key characteristics of thermite. Plus color analysis of the metal as it cooled during fall has shown that it was not steel but aluminum instead.
Given the amount of aluminum in an airliner and the temperatures of the fires inside the towers, this appears rather plausible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no evidence to support any government conspiracy. Just a
lot of "self-stimulation". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvDcXfWznzQ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If there weren't stupid and crazy people in the world then none of the rest of us could be intelligent or sane.
Thank the lord for the conspiracy theorists! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If there weren't stupid and crazy people in the world then none of the rest of us could be intelligent or sane. Thank the lord for the conspiracy theorists! well i find that most intelligent people are quite insane and that stupid people are quite normal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
volant7
on
Sun 08/28/11 05:33 AM
|
|
FEMA deathcamps? Really? Where might those be? google it fema death camps locations but dont worry you dont have to find them they will find you lol |
|
|
|
|
