So, terrorists?

**Alundil** · 09-10-11, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by SoySoldier

I find myself agreeing with many people I often argue with in this thread; it's good to know y'all ain't a bunch of total whack-jobs!

Everything has been covered, I don't need to add anything.

LOL....this

Sent via highly charged bolt of electricity.

**Xavsnipe** · 09-10-11, 02:45 PM

Yea disregard my first post for sake of this thread. Let’s start on square 1. How things happened.

Your answer to #1. Hitler can easily produce whatever kind of maps or information you would want to see. And if you want to visit that place to actually see if there are no concentration camps...Hitler would simply say, mm sorry that area is classified because the gov’t is conducting research bla bla bla..hahah, purely a hypothetical but I hope you can kind of see what I’m trying to get at when I say “consider the source”.

#2. I agree with you. Debunking one theory does not automatically mean the other one is correct. Completely agree with you. But it opens the forum to questions and hypotheses as to how it happened.

#3. You know there will ALWAYS be a bias with both stories. That’s why, an intelligent educated person like yourself, will pick and choose the information you think is relevant and not tarnished by biased opinion.

**BruceBloodMaster** · 09-10-11, 03:05 PM

Look this country Couldn't keep a secret if its life depended on it....... that is just a fact look at WikiLeaks. What makes anyone even Remotely believe that 9/11 was a govt run op that we wouldn't have found out about Already. Thats not to say that I Trust the govt 100% of the time ! BTW the plane hit the towers at a little over 500 mph just a point and it was loaded with 85,000 lbs of Jet Fuel at 6 lbs a gallon. I think that much Mass is enough to knock down the towers not even counting the weight of the aircraft. Knowing these few facts plus having a Basic understanding of Gravity will tell you that sooner or later those towers were coming down after the plane ran into them.

**deathgodusmc** · 09-10-11, 03:13 PM

As much as i would like to say the government cant keep a secret i would have to disagree. There are plenty of things that the government does that the lay man would never know about. If they are so bad at it why have none of us seen a real picture of Osama with a bullet hole in his head? Why is it people didnt know about the sr71 until it had been flying around for years?

The truth is when it matters they can keep a secret but the evidence on the towers from the government and outside sources all conclude they came down due to damage sustained. The only ones that dispute that are people with no background that would aid in piecing it together or never even went to the site. How can you claim to be an expert on what happened if you never examined one piece of evicence?

You may even be fairly good in your field but fail miserably on giving the reasons for something if all you went by is the news reports. You have to ignore damn near everything to say the planes didnt bring the buildings down.

**Rawr** · 09-11-11, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by Xavsnipe

Yea disregard my first post for sake of this thread. Let’s start on square 1. How things happened.

Your answer to #1. Hitler can easily produce whatever kind of maps or information you would want to see. And if you want to visit that place to actually see if there are no concentration camps...Hitler would simply say, mm sorry that area is classified because the gov’t is conducting research bla bla bla..hahah, purely a hypothetical but I hope you can kind of see what I’m trying to get at when I say “consider the source”.

#2. I agree with you. Debunking one theory does not automatically mean the other one is correct. Completely agree with you. But it opens the forum to questions and hypotheses as to how it happened.

#3. You know there will ALWAYS be a bias with both stories. That’s why, an intelligent educated person like yourself, will pick and choose the information you think is relevant and not tarnished by biased opinion.

I'll just leave this here.....
Godwin's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

**deathgodusmc** · 09-11-11, 07:53 PM

LOL that would never happen around here Rawr.

**Xavsnipe** · 09-11-11, 08:29 PM

lol that’s so witty...you get a cookie rawr!

**Rawr** · 09-11-11, 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by Xavsnipe

lol that’s so witty...you get a cookie rawr!

Thanks, I try! ;-)

**DuDDy** · 09-12-11, 02:31 AM

wow looks like im late to this lil party.

So I decided to checkout that site and let me just say what a bunch bs it is and here is why.

First thing I did was look at the petition to seek out the truth. Theres a nice impressive list there of both architects and engineers. Dont rely to heavily on what the architects say. Outside of knowing where to put load bearing walls and building design they know very little about structural aspect of design. They spend more time caring about things like aesthetic appeal and functionality more than structural support. In school amongst us civil engineers the joke was always that a civil engineer could be an architect but an architect could never be a civil engineer and they design it, but we make it stand. As for the list of engineers, there is a vast array of different engineering disciplines. Of course there are your CE's, ME's, material engineers and what not, but theres also computer, software, electrical, industrial and manufacturing engineers that once again know very little of structural engineering. Also factor in that there are just over 1500 people who signed that petition out of the millions of registered engineers and architects in this country just goes to show how much integrity and value this site actually has.

As for the evidence they provide once again it is all a bunch of bs. And heres why:

People on the ground saying they heard "explosions" is very wishy washy. Did you ever stop to think why they may have heard explosions? Fact of the matter is that 2 buildings the size of city blocks collapsed, starting with the top floors. Of course floors falling onto each other and collapsing would sound like explosions. Add to that the firefighter survivors from inside the buildings never heard any explosions, AND that there is no evidence anywhere in the debris of any sort of demolition or explosion (other than the fireballs of the jet fuel exploding just further speaks that it was structural failure.

Another cornerstone of the argument is that the structural steal didnt melt. Now this is where Im actually disappointed with a lot of the engineers on this site. Any structural/civil/engineer in general knows that steel doesnt have to melt to lose its load bearing capacity and reach failure. The temperature for this is actually quite lower than the melting point of steel. The temperatures in those fires was enough to weaken the steel enough to the point of bearing capacity failure. If you dont believe me, get a I beam of about 10 feet and load it with about 500 lbs of anything and suspend it over a fire heated by jet fuel. You will see that steel will not melt, but lose its structural integrity and thus failing.

As for the claim that a demolition crew did this just stop and think of the absurdity of this. You would require a crew of about 100 guys to even do this spread out over years of preparation. Not to mention that they had to do it in secret without ever being caught OR seen for that matter. Guys making cuts, drilling holes and doing any kind of demolition work make a lot of noise and attract a lot of attention. And being able to keep this many people quiet about it in the process of the preparation and the aftermath is unfounded. Someone somewhere would eventually mess up and say something or do something that would threaten the very livelihood of 1000's of other people required to pull of something like this.

Fact of the matter is a plane hit each tower. The impact of the collision with the plane in each building blew off the fire retardant on the structural steel and exposed it to the super heated fires that ensued. The floors of one building fell onto each other thus causing a collapse. The other building had the top floors fall off to the side because of the location of the impact and caused the rest of the failure of the building. These are the FACTS of 9/11.

**DR.F33LG00D** · 09-12-11, 10:43 PM

Originally Posted by DuDDy

wow looks like im late to this lil party.

So I decided to checkout that site and let me just say what a bunch bs it is and here is why.

First thing I did was look at the petition to seek out the truth. Theres a nice impressive list there of both architects and engineers. Dont rely to heavily on what the architects say. Outside of knowing where to put load bearing walls and building design they know very little about structural aspect of design. They spend more time caring about things like aesthetic appeal and functionality more than structural support. In school amongst us civil engineers the joke was always that a civil engineer could be an architect but an architect could never be a civil engineer and they design it, but we make it stand. As for the list of engineers, there is a vast array of different engineering disciplines. Of course there are your CE's, ME's, material engineers and what not, but theres also computer, software, electrical, industrial and manufacturing engineers that once again know very little of structural engineering. Also factor in that there are just over 1500 people who signed that petition out of the millions of registered engineers and architects in this country just goes to show how much integrity and value this site actually has.

As for the evidence they provide once again it is all a bunch of bs. And heres why:

People on the ground saying they heard "explosions" is very wishy washy. Did you ever stop to think why they may have heard explosions? Fact of the matter is that 2 buildings the size of city blocks collapsed, starting with the top floors. Of course floors falling onto each other and collapsing would sound like explosions. Add to that the firefighter survivors from inside the buildings never heard any explosions, AND that there is no evidence anywhere in the debris of any sort of demolition or explosion (other than the fireballs of the jet fuel exploding just further speaks that it was structural failure.

Another cornerstone of the argument is that the structural steal didnt melt. Now this is where Im actually disappointed with a lot of the engineers on this site. Any structural/civil/engineer in general knows that steel doesnt have to melt to lose its load bearing capacity and reach failure. The temperature for this is actually quite lower than the melting point of steel. The temperatures in those fires was enough to weaken the steel enough to the point of bearing capacity failure. If you dont believe me, get a I beam of about 10 feet and load it with about 500 lbs of anything and suspend it over a fire heated by jet fuel. You will see that steel will not melt, but lose its structural integrity and thus failing.

As for the claim that a demolition crew did this just stop and think of the absurdity of this. You would require a crew of about 100 guys to even do this spread out over years of preparation. Not to mention that they had to do it in secret without ever being caught OR seen for that matter. Guys making cuts, drilling holes and doing any kind of demolition work make a lot of noise and attract a lot of attention. And being able to keep this many people quiet about it in the process of the preparation and the aftermath is unfounded. Someone somewhere would eventually mess up and say something or do something that would threaten the very livelihood of 1000's of other people required to pull of something like this.

Fact of the matter is a plane hit each tower. The impact of the collision with the plane in each building blew off the fire retardant on the structural steel and exposed it to the super heated fires that ensued. The floors of one building fell onto each other thus causing a collapse. The other building had the top floors fall off to the side because of the location of the impact and caused the rest of the failure of the building. These are the FACTS of 9/11.

Didn't care to get involved in the shitstorm of high drama I started, but I think DuDDy's post sums up the whole thing quite well.