Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Midnight_v's Conspiracy Thread.

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Sharp View Post
    And who is to say there isnt a lot underground?
    I didn't think of that, but very true.
    When talking to a fool, be sure he isn't doing the same.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by midnight_v View Post
      It didn't get hit by a plane, and apparently it didn't "topple over" like it should have, it collapse in on itself, like the Twin Towers did. Like a building demolished by charges would.
      First off, there are steel beams that ran the entire length of the trade centers. These beams support the entire superstructure of the building. Jet fuel burns between 800-1500 degrees.

      Steel's melting point is around 1370 degree's. The beams didnt need to melt, they just needed to be weakend. Once the top portion of the building collapsed onto the next set of floors, that weight transferred to the next floor and was compiled as the building countinued to collapse on itself. No conspiracy in that at all.
      Last edited by CityCopDC; 09-17-2008, 09:04 PM.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by BD380 View Post
        Umm... look where I work. I know a little more about it than you do...
        I had a guy try and tell me that I didnt see the tail section of the plane sticking out of the pentagon. I apologize, I, the state troopers, arlington county fire/ems/police, pentagon police/fire and dcfd and a whole slew of other folks must not have seen it either....

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by CityCopDC View Post
          First off, there are steel beams that ran the entire length of the trade centers. These beams support the entire superstructure of the building. Jet fuel burns between 800-1500 degrees.

          Steel's melting point is around 1370 degree's. The beams didnt need to melt, they just needed to be weakend. Once the top portion of the building collapsed onto the next set of floors, that weight transferred to the next floor and was compiled as the building countinued to collapse on itself. No conspiracy in that at all.
          Right but, even at the melting point the building wouldn't have fell in freefall like that steel takes time to melt, hell Ice takes time to melt.... Also what about tower 7?
          I'm willing to discuss it at least. I'm not convinced either way.
          They will all look up to me and shout, "Save us!", and I will whisper back... "No."

          LAW is not JUSTICE

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by midnight_v View Post
            Right but, even at the melting point the building wouldn't have fell in freefall like that steel takes time to melt, hell Ice takes time to melt.... Also what about tower 7?
            I'm willing to discuss it at least. I'm not convinced either way.
            Guess you dont read (or dont believe) Popular Mechanics......

            All it took was for a couple of support beams to give way.....once one of the top floors went, it started a cascade effect......

            also, some seem to think that WTC 7 was undamaged, and that it was blown up..........the argument for this is photos taken from the front of the building, showing little damage......

            They neglect to show the pictures from the BACK of the building.....it looked as bad or worse than the Murrah building in OKC......
            The posts on this forum by this poster are of his personal opinion, and his personal opinion alone

            "Politicians are like diapers. They need to be changed often and for the same reason"

            "We fight not for glory; nor for wealth; nor honor, but only and alone we fight for freedom, which no good man surrenders but with his life"

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Sharp View Post
              I do believe that we landed on the moon (Mythbusters disproved the arguments). I do believe there is more going on than we know about. But I dont know how or why or who, etc.
              Maybe the government paid them to say it really did happen.....
              He teaches my hands to make war,
              so that my arms can bend a bow of bronze.
              Psalms 18:34

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by SPC-1 View Post
                Maybe the government paid them to say it really did happen.....
                Fair point.
                "...and the taking of a life is murder. And the punishment for murder is.... well it varies from state to state and by race, but...." - Homer J Simpson.

                Police: "Stop and we'll shoot!"
                Dilbert: "Stop AND we'll shoot? If you're gonna shoot, why should we stop?"
                Police: "Well, it would be alot easier for us. The targets at the shooting range don't run."

                R.I.P. Momma Coleman. You may have left our world, but you have NOT left our hearts.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by LA DEP View Post
                  Guess you dont read (or dont believe) Popular Mechanics......

                  All it took was for a couple of support beams to give way.....once one of the top floors went, it started a cascade effect......

                  also, some seem to think that WTC 7 was undamaged, and that it was blown up..........the argument for this is photos taken from the front of the building, showing little damage......

                  They neglect to show the pictures from the BACK of the building.....it looked as bad or worse than the Murrah building in OKC......
                  *sigh* While its really hard to argue with William Wallce. . .

                  also, some seem to think that WTC 7 was undamaged, and that it was blown up..........the argument for this is photos taken from the front of the building, showing little damage......
                  Please provide pics showing the back of the building or a link. Also, sir, even if the building was damaged on the back ... FROM WHAT? Is the question. I dont' know, but I'd like to find out.
                  Now I do indeed read popular mechanics, though my subscription is to popular science. (I normally pic up random PM issues up off the shelf).
                  What your describing is the "pancake" theory.
                  Most engineers would tell you:
                  Pancake theory, would have left support beams, at least some of them standing up Those are all tha would have been left, but they would have been left.
                  Why? Due to the fact that the building fell to the earth in like 10 seconds and was flat. Freefall... seriously? If I dropped a silver dollar off the top of either tower that quater would hit the ground in 8.xx seconds.
                  Thats encoutering no resistance the tower top encountered plenty of resistance. . .

                  Though I'm tempted to use the above argument of popular science may no be willing to offend its readers, but suggesting that it didn't occur exactly as the government suggests.

                  Just look at how unpopular the very suggestion that we should rexxamine it is...
                  They will all look up to me and shout, "Save us!", and I will whisper back... "No."

                  LAW is not JUSTICE

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    I'll find the link for you.....WTC 7 (and around 30 other buildings) was damaged from the collapse of WTC 1 and 2........

                    and Popular Science/Popular Mechanics was simply showing how it occured.....each of the jet liners was a nice big fuel air bomb......

                    the simplest answer is most often the correct one........

                    but, there are always those in society that want to believe that the evil government is always up to no good......that we would destroy several BILLION dollars worth of property, simply to start a fight with the Islamics.....when we already HAD plenty of cause to go give several groups a pasting......
                    The posts on this forum by this poster are of his personal opinion, and his personal opinion alone

                    "Politicians are like diapers. They need to be changed often and for the same reason"

                    "We fight not for glory; nor for wealth; nor honor, but only and alone we fight for freedom, which no good man surrenders but with his life"

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Personally, my take on 9-11 is that it was not a government conspiracy, but simply failing to 'connect the dots' along with more than a little bit of incompetence at higher levels.......

                      There were all sorts of 'warnings and indicators' that something big was about to happen......there were several informants (and even a couple of FBI agents) that were jumping up and down about Middle Easterners wanting to learn to fly,,,,but not to land ect......

                      For it to have occurred as the '9-11 truthers' would like it to have, would require hundreds, if not thousands of like minded co-conspirators.....all of who would have to remain silent forever about what they did......

                      Those of us in the LE field know how hard it is for a handful of people to keep a secret for very long....hundreds?....isnt going to happen.....
                      The posts on this forum by this poster are of his personal opinion, and his personal opinion alone

                      "Politicians are like diapers. They need to be changed often and for the same reason"

                      "We fight not for glory; nor for wealth; nor honor, but only and alone we fight for freedom, which no good man surrenders but with his life"

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Well, like V said "People should not be afraid of their governments, but governments should be afraid of their people."
                        "It's not how they die, but how they live that makes them a hero."

                        Originally posted by George Carlin
                        You are not a loser, you are the last winner.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by LA DEP View Post
                          Personally, my take on 9-11 is that it was not a government conspiracy, but simply failing to 'connect the dots' along with more than a little bit of incompetence at higher levels.......

                          There were all sorts of 'warnings and indicators' that something big was about to happen......there were several informants (and even a couple of FBI agents) that were jumping up and down about Middle Easterners wanting to learn to fly,,,,but not to land ect......

                          For it to have occurred as the '9-11 truthers' would like it to have, would require hundreds, if not thousands of like minded co-conspirators.....all of who would have to remain silent forever about what they did......

                          Those of us in the LE field know how hard it is for a handful of people to keep a secret for very long....hundreds?....isnt going to happen.....




                          So true... I forget the exact saying I heard but something along the lines of "the only way two people can keep a secret is if one of them is dead"

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            I've seen the video in which Osama Bin Laden is describing and depicting what he appears to think will happen to the buildings. He seems to think the impact of the plane would cause the part of the building above the plane to break off and tip over, like a tree felled with an axe. He didn't appear to suppose that the top wouldn't tip over, and instead would collapse the whole building.

                            This nonsense about the government having done it is truly enough to leave one gasping for air. No, the government didn't do it. The worst corruption we've ever had in our government has never come to a level that even remotely approaches it being prepared to perpetrate such an atrocity.

                            I got a call on 9-11-2001. I was asleep. Someone who worked for the government, and who knew I'd been working after midnight, called me in the regular AM, waking me up, and said "turn on the TV -- the World Trade Center and the Pentagon have been blown up -- we're 5 minutes from martial law". I said "don't wake me up with this ---- ". He said "turn on the TV". I did. OMG.

                            When the President visited Ground Zero for the first time after the horrific event, the grim look on his face was in my opinion something he couldn't possibly have faked. I remember one of the older firefighters there saying loud and clear, "get 'em George". In America, a firefighter, standing there covered in dust and soot from a disaster, can call the Head of State to action with a bare imperative by his first name.

                            God bless America.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by midnight_v View Post
                              Right but, even at the melting point the building wouldn't have fell in freefall like that steel takes time to melt, hell Ice takes time to melt.... Also what about tower 7?
                              I'm willing to discuss it at least. I'm not convinced either way.
                              You are not listening. The steel beams that supported the trade centers DID NOT NEED TO MELT OR REACH ITS MELTING POINT. The steel beams simply needed to be weakend. Being exposed to 800 degree heat will reduce the integrity of the metal. If you have a support beam thats supporting a ton, do you think it will countinue to support a ton if it is weakend? Why do you think in the first attack on the trade center that they put the explosive laden truck next to the main support beam? Because if that beam was weakend or destroyed, the entire building would come down.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by LA DEP View Post
                                also, some seem to think that WTC 7 was undamaged, and that it was blown up..........the argument for this is photos taken from the front of the building, showing little damage......

                                They neglect to show the pictures from the BACK of the building.....it looked as bad or worse than the Murrah building in OKC......
                                Exactly. If you had hundreds of thousands of tons of concrete and steel falling on and around the building, I would think it to would be weakend.

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 4054 users online. 238 members and 3816 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 158,966 at 05:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X