9/11 conspiracy theorists multiply

Page 13 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
Originally posted by: AAjax
But my intended point is a bit larger, that a bunch of guys with box cutters could pull somthing off like that and be succsesfull without the collusion of higher powers. (the effective stand down or NORAD for instance)

Jax

You think that airport security has some kind of mythical aura around it that keeps these things from happening? Hardly! Your basic argument seems to be "Such a hijacking could never happen, because it sounds so ridiculous when written down." Well, my friend, the world is fvcking hilarious. Illogical, even stupid, things happen every day. And the easiest group in the world to manipulate is a group of mixed strangers, such as on an airplane. Sure, there's no way that a terrorist armed with a box cutter could fend off an entire plane full of passengers. Do you want to be the first person to stand up and fight him? No? Someone else will do it, surely. After all, I haven't had any training. Maybe they'll be an air marshall...it's their job, after all. As soon as they land the plane and make demands, just like every other hijacking, Captain America himself will command a squadron of Rangers to free us all. Happens every time! Even if the terrorists kill a couple passengers, surely it won't be me...what would be the odds of that happening?

The reason why it worked, was because it hadn't been done before. US security is a low-level job filled with unimaginative sorts. They take their job seriously, but they only look for the threats they have seen before.
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,544
924
126
Originally posted by: preslove
Talking to a 9/11 conspiracy theorist is like talking to a Christian Fundamentalist loony toon about evolution.

:thumbsup::laugh: That is sig worthy.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
64
91
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: preslove
Talking to a 9/11 conspiracy theorist is like talking to a Christian Fundamentalist loony toon about evolution.

:thumbsup::laugh: That is sig worthy.

Hey man, if you're going to sig quote me, at least put my name on it
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,544
924
126
Originally posted by: preslove
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: preslove
Talking to a 9/11 conspiracy theorist is like talking to a Christian Fundamentalist loony toon about evolution.

:thumbsup::laugh: That is sig worthy.

Hey man, if you're going to sig quote me, at least put my name on it

Happy now?
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
65,717
14,122
146
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Without getting into the discussion of their validity, IMO, a big part of why all these conspiracy theories get so much play and so many followers, is because the administration is seen as not being open nor honest with it's citizens, and in the opinion of many, has shown it's propensity for playing dirty in order to get it's way.

Myself, I'm one of the suspicious bstards who immediately thought of the Mossad as being behind all this...what better way to draw the U.S. into their middle east disputes, than to attack us on our home soil, under the guise of a terrorist attack?

did you quote the first paragraph (and the second being a response or write it yourself? i swear i read the same thing in an earlier post



Nope, sorry, can't attribute my "mental defects" to anyone else...those are just the ravings of a sick mind...
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
64
91
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: preslove
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: preslove
Talking to a 9/11 conspiracy theorist is like talking to a Christian Fundamentalist loony toon about evolution.

:thumbsup::laugh: That is sig worthy.

Hey man, if you're going to sig quote me, at least put my name on it

Happy now?

Yes, I'm mollified
 

iliopsoas

Golden Member
Jul 14, 2001
1,844
2
0
Originally posted by: DonVito
Although I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, the poll numbers in this area are, IMO, clearly a by-product of the Bush administration's willingness to engage in all kinds of skullduggery and lie about it. I personally don't believe they have the competence to carry out a plan of this magnitude and keep it secret (and I also don't believe that President Bush, in particular, would green-light the murder of thousands of American civilians), but it's undeniably the case that 9/11 enabled them to carry out the pre-ordained agenda of the PNAC, and there's just no question that that plan was and is the number one agenda item for the Bush presidency.

A lot of well-qualified engineers, academics, and firefighters support a 9/11 conspiracy theory, and I think it's important that we are able to discuss this in a civil way - if anything it annoys me that so many people feel compelled to throw around the "tinfoil hat" barbs, which I think are nonproductive and antithetical to the American right to freedom of speech.


Yep, it's great to exercise one's freedom of speech. But that also means that we can call conspiracy theorists a bunch of idiots, morons, asshats...
 

AAjax

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2001
3,798
0
0
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: AAjax
But my intended point is a bit larger, that a bunch of guys with box cutters could pull somthing off like that and be succsesfull without the collusion of higher powers. (the effective stand down or NORAD for instance)

Jax

You think that airport security has some kind of mythical aura around it that keeps these things from happening? Hardly! Your basic argument seems to be "Such a hijacking could never happen, because it sounds so ridiculous when written down." Well, my friend, the world is fvcking hilarious. Illogical, even stupid, things happen every day. And the easiest group in the world to manipulate is a group of mixed strangers, such as on an airplane. Sure, there's no way that a terrorist armed with a box cutter could fend off an entire plane full of passengers. Do you want to be the first person to stand up and fight him? No? Someone else will do it, surely. After all, I haven't had any training. Maybe they'll be an air marshall...it's their job, after all. As soon as they land the plane and make demands, just like every other hijacking, Captain America himself will command a squadron of Rangers to free us all. Happens every time! Even if the terrorists kill a couple passengers, surely it won't be me...what would be the odds of that happening?

The reason why it worked, was because it hadn't been done before. US security is a low-level job filled with unimaginative sorts. They take their job seriously, but they only look for the threats they have seen before.


you seemed to have missed my point on collusion, and specificly to the effective stand-down of NORAD. I dont really doubt that multiple planes can be hijacked, but I take issue with the fact that for over two hours NORAD couldnt even intercept. Two hours....

 

ntdz

Diamond Member
Aug 5, 2004
6,989
0
0
Originally posted by: glugglug
If you really look at the evidence, occam's razor says the GOP was behind it.

Al Quaeda is the conspiracy theory.

What's a conspiracy is whether you don't know how to spell, OR you intentionally spell words wrong.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
Originally posted by: AAjax
you seemed to have missed my point on collusion, and specificly to the effective stand-down of NORAD. I dont really doubt that multiple planes can be hijacked, but I take issue with the fact that for over two hours NORAD couldnt even intercept. Two hours....

I admit that I haven't spent a whole lot of time looking at the specifics, but frankly, I would find it far more shocking if the US could put armed fighters with shoot-to-kill orders at the location of an airplane, within 15 minutes of learning that it was hijacked. Especially if NORAD's in the middle of war games at the time, with all the confusion that would bring. And this at a time when standard policy with hijacked airlines was to let them land, then negotiate or storm the craft as the situation allowed.
 

iliopsoas

Golden Member
Jul 14, 2001
1,844
2
0
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron. The laws of Physics clearly show that it was impossible for the WTC to collapse that fast without explosives.

First GM foods, now this? Wow. You really believe every conspiracy you read.
It seems that the RoundUp you ingested last night is affecting your cognitive ability. I suggest trying a meal from Whole Foods before you completely transform from 50-100% dumbass.

LOL. You bought into the Whole Foods bullcrap too? Puhleeze.

High school physics teachers don't impress me. Suddenly your dad is an expert now?
 

skreet

Senior member
Sep 7, 2004
681
0
0
Why would anyone post this here. You're asking for flamewars everytime you do this.

Do you really expect a sensible conversation.

Am I the only person who will say "I dont know if Al Queda is a conspiracy or not". Everyone's a fscking expert in the subject on one side of the fence.
 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,340
1
81
Originally posted by: voodoodrul

This issue can be solved quickly using some basic math. It's physics. Regardless of the reason the upper portion of the building started to fall, the floors below it exert/absorb a lot of energy as they "pancake".. Gravity is constant at 9.86m/sec^2. The acceleration of the upper tower towards the ground should NOT be 9.86m/sec^2 because a lot of energy was expended in the pancaking. I'm not saying one way or the other, but some number crunching, by a panel of unbiased professionals, in this area would be interesting.

Height of twin towers: 417m
Freefall time, ignoring air resistance = sqrt(2h/g) = sqrt(2 * 417m / 9.8m/s^2) = 9.26s.

Assuming a totally even weight distribution, and that the lower floors absorb zero energy in pancaking, other than that from momentum transferred from upper floors, the minimum increase in time that causes is a factor of sqrt(2), giving a minimum time of 13.096s, before remaining structural integrity or air resistance is even taken into account.

So something actually accelerated the collapse.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
Originally posted by: glugglug
So something actually accelerated the collapse.

OK, I'll even let you plant secret government conspiracy explosives in the tower. Explain how that could possibly exert a net DOWNWARDS acceleration, or admit that your numbers are wrong.
 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,340
1
81
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: glugglug
So something actually accelerated the collapse.

OK, I'll even let you plant secret government conspiracy explosives in the tower. Explain how that could possibly exert a net DOWNWARDS acceleration, or admit that your numbers are wrong.

Well, most of the sites positing the explosive theory state that the explosions were seen on the 12th? and 24th floors a moment before the towers fell. Maybe the gap after that explosion left a vaccuum sucking the upper floors down a bit? I'll admit that isn't nearly enough to account for the difference.

A more plausible explanation for the 0.86s difference between 9.26s freefall (assuming explosions causing all floors to begin their fall near simultaneously) and the 8.4s observed could be that it takes time to actually notice the building is falling on video. The distance fallen during the first 0.86s would be only 3.62m, which wouldn't be very obvious on camera. Without explosions, the minimum time, if the building was more fragile than a house of cards, would still be 13.096s.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,068
18,475
146
Originally posted by: glugglug
Originally posted by: voodoodrul

This issue can be solved quickly using some basic math. It's physics. Regardless of the reason the upper portion of the building started to fall, the floors below it exert/absorb a lot of energy as they "pancake".. Gravity is constant at 9.86m/sec^2. The acceleration of the upper tower towards the ground should NOT be 9.86m/sec^2 because a lot of energy was expended in the pancaking. I'm not saying one way or the other, but some number crunching, by a panel of unbiased professionals, in this area would be interesting.

Height of twin towers: 417m
Freefall time, ignoring air resistance = sqrt(2h/g) = sqrt(2 * 417m / 9.8m/s^2) = 9.26s.

Assuming a totally even weight distribution, and that the lower floors absorb zero energy in pancaking, other than that from momentum transferred from upper floors, the minimum increase in time that causes is a factor of sqrt(2), giving a minimum time of 13.096s, before remaining structural integrity or air resistance is even taken into account.

So something actually accelerated the collapse.

This thread contains enough information to make you feel like a fool for posting that.

Maybe you should read it?

A hint: The material ejected to the sides at the beginning of the collapse made it to the ground more than 2x as fast as the building itself collapsed.
 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,340
1
81
Originally posted by: Amused
This thread contains enough information to make you feel like a fool for posting that.

Maybe you should read it?

A hint: The material ejected to the sides at the beginning of the collapse made it to the ground more than 2x as fast as the building itself collapsed.

Then that material must have been ejected with a high downward velocity, not just to the side. Probably some bits ejected upwards as well.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Any possibility that the increase in air pressue forced debris out the horizontal directions than the vertical. That would be the weakest zones.
 

Midlander

Platinum Member
Dec 21, 2002
2,456
1
0
So let's see.

First we have to plan the event with the hijackers. Then we have to make sure we put sufficient explosives in an office building that gets used every day (and hide them) so that we can blast sections of the building down. Remembering that a truckload of explosives was unable to do that in the garage means that it will take a lot of explosives per floor. Then we have to time everything perfectly with the beginning of the failure of the upper sections of the tower. (Of course we might be able to start the initial failure if we know exactly what floors of the tower will be hit by the newby pilots.) And we have to be sure there is no residue left for analysis.

Yeah. It could happen. :roll:
 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,340
1
81
Originally posted by: Midlander
So let's see.

First we have to plan the event with the hijackers.
Not necessarily. Look up "Project Home Run". The technology exists to take over the planes from the ground, and was installed on the flights specifically "in case of" a terrorist attack. In "9/11 In Plane Sight", they also explain how the planes which crashed appear to be military refueling craft, NOT commercial passenger jets. There was in fact a made-for-TV movie that aired in 2000 where the plot was a fake hijacking where planes were crashed into the twin towers using the project Home Run remote control system, destroying the towers as an excuse to go to war. It aired on FOX of all places.

Then we have to make sure we put sufficient explosives in an office building that gets used every day (and hide them) so that we can blast sections of the building down. Remembering that a truckload of explosives was unable to do that in the garage means that it will take a lot of explosives per floor.

Which would be why the towers were closed down the 2 previous weekends for "elevator maintenance."

Then we have to time everything perfectly with the beginning of the failure of the upper sections of the tower.
Why? Who says the planes were related to the failure? More likely they are there for the purpose of distraction.

And we have to be sure there is no residue left for analysis.
Underwriter Labs (the insurance company for the buildings) report said that they DID find residue from plastic explosives.


 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,068
18,475
146
Originally posted by: glugglug
Originally posted by: Amused
This thread contains enough information to make you feel like a fool for posting that.

Maybe you should read it?

A hint: The material ejected to the sides at the beginning of the collapse made it to the ground more than 2x as fast as the building itself collapsed.

Then that material must have been ejected with a high downward velocity, not just to the side. Probably some bits ejected upwards as well.

Um, no, it was ejected to the SIDE, then fell down. You can SEE it on the video.

You need to believe this so bad, that you deny the obvious?

http://www.911myths.com/html/freefall.html

Stop being such a fool.
 

Miramonti

Lifer
Aug 26, 2000
28,653
100
106
I'd probably be more open to conspiracy theories if all of the theorists didn't work together so secretly behind everyone else's back to promote them.

As long as that's happening, conspiracies are all fiction as far as I'm concerned.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,068
18,475
146
Originally posted by: glugglug

Underwriter Labs (the insurance company for the buildings) report said that they DID find residue from plastic explosives.

No, they did not.
 

g8wayrebel

Senior member
Nov 15, 2004
694
0
0
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron. The laws of Physics clearly show that it was impossible for the WTC to collapse that fast without explosives.



The laws of physics were stated. Even if explosives were on the 94th floor (NOT) it would have hit the 93 floors below it. OOPS ,there goes the time relative proof!!!!!!!!!!!
Even a third grader could see the fallacy in this falling as fast as air theory.

I sure as hell hope your Father is teaching this in a higher education forum for which people pay to listen to this liberal BS. I sure as hell don't think he has any right to teach to in a public school.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |