CrackerJax
New Member
Post 1171.... the "truther" does not know how to debate and doesn't seem to have his facts in context. That debate was a mismatch.....
Oh Goodie! ... More on 911 (inside job) :)
- Thread starter GrowRebel
- Start date
- Status
GrowRebel
Well-Known Member
Video one ...
The official story of the collapse of the twin towers is that gravity caused them to crush themselves...
There are principally two official theories: The column failure theory and the truss failure theory. Both are frequently called "pancake theories"
Let's examine NIST's report on the damage to each building.
WTC 1:35 ext. columns severed
6 core columns severed 43 of 47 core columns stripped of insulation
WTC 2: 33 ext. columns severed. 10 core columns severed ... 39 of 42 core columns stripped of insulation
PROBLEM
People in the towers at the time of the impact reported sways of several feet. But the deflection was not large enough to be noticeable in any of the video footage. The sways were less than the towers experience in winter storms.
Investigators diagrammed estimated column damage for both impacts. They showed about 13% of the north tower's perimeter columns broken and 10% of the south tower's broken. (diagrams shown)
Thus both towers lost less than an eighth of their perimeter columns.
And there are several problems with NIST claims about the damage to the south tower.
First the core columns were thicker on the lower floors, where they had more weight to support. The core columns at the south tower's 80th floor, which was the impact zone, would have been considerably thicker than the core columns at the north tower's 95th floor impact zone. They would have been much more difficult to severe.
Second the north tower was hit straight on, as is evident from video and pictures.(diagram shown) ... but the south tower as video and pictures show (shows more still shots) was struck near the right corner, with the result that the right engine exited the building with little obstruction(shows photo of engine)
The fuselage of the jet that crashed into the south tower appears to have almost entirely missed the core structure. In fact, only the plane's left wing and engine would have been able to any damage to the core. But the wing, being made of aluminum and having already encountered perimeter columns would probably not have been able to severe any of the much thicker columns. NIST itself has stated that an engine could severe one column at most.
If it seems that only one or two of the south tower's core columns could have been severed where did NIST get the figure of 10?
The highly redundant connection of perimeter columns via the horizontal spandrell plates on every floor assured that gravity loads of the broken columns were easily transferred to other parts of the wall. The fires were not nearly hot enough to significantly soften steel in either tower. The fires in the south tower were small compared to other high-rise fires, and were diminishing at the time of it's collapse. In both towers, the smoke darken a few minutes after the crashes, suggesting that most of the jet fuel had burned off. Dark smoke indicated oxygen starved fire. In both towers, there was no visible areas of fire extending to large portions of multiple adjacent floors .. (shows still shots) Hot fires would have to simultaneously cover several entire floors to have any chance of heating the columns to 800 degrees C. The fires remained confined to the crash zone in the south tower and never spread to the other side of the building. STRONG FIRES TEND TO SPREAD. The exterior columns were not visibly glowing red hot as they would have had they been above 700 degrees C
So this is what was covered in the first video. Clearly it debunks those idiots and their pancake theories. It's too time consuming to do a break down like this ... I will have to give a brief summary of the others.
The official story of the collapse of the twin towers is that gravity caused them to crush themselves...
There are principally two official theories: The column failure theory and the truss failure theory. Both are frequently called "pancake theories"
Let's examine NIST's report on the damage to each building.
WTC 1:35 ext. columns severed
6 core columns severed 43 of 47 core columns stripped of insulation
WTC 2: 33 ext. columns severed. 10 core columns severed ... 39 of 42 core columns stripped of insulation
PROBLEM
People in the towers at the time of the impact reported sways of several feet. But the deflection was not large enough to be noticeable in any of the video footage. The sways were less than the towers experience in winter storms.
Investigators diagrammed estimated column damage for both impacts. They showed about 13% of the north tower's perimeter columns broken and 10% of the south tower's broken. (diagrams shown)
Thus both towers lost less than an eighth of their perimeter columns.
And there are several problems with NIST claims about the damage to the south tower.
First the core columns were thicker on the lower floors, where they had more weight to support. The core columns at the south tower's 80th floor, which was the impact zone, would have been considerably thicker than the core columns at the north tower's 95th floor impact zone. They would have been much more difficult to severe.
Second the north tower was hit straight on, as is evident from video and pictures.(diagram shown) ... but the south tower as video and pictures show (shows more still shots) was struck near the right corner, with the result that the right engine exited the building with little obstruction(shows photo of engine)
The fuselage of the jet that crashed into the south tower appears to have almost entirely missed the core structure. In fact, only the plane's left wing and engine would have been able to any damage to the core. But the wing, being made of aluminum and having already encountered perimeter columns would probably not have been able to severe any of the much thicker columns. NIST itself has stated that an engine could severe one column at most.
If it seems that only one or two of the south tower's core columns could have been severed where did NIST get the figure of 10?
The highly redundant connection of perimeter columns via the horizontal spandrell plates on every floor assured that gravity loads of the broken columns were easily transferred to other parts of the wall. The fires were not nearly hot enough to significantly soften steel in either tower. The fires in the south tower were small compared to other high-rise fires, and were diminishing at the time of it's collapse. In both towers, the smoke darken a few minutes after the crashes, suggesting that most of the jet fuel had burned off. Dark smoke indicated oxygen starved fire. In both towers, there was no visible areas of fire extending to large portions of multiple adjacent floors .. (shows still shots) Hot fires would have to simultaneously cover several entire floors to have any chance of heating the columns to 800 degrees C. The fires remained confined to the crash zone in the south tower and never spread to the other side of the building. STRONG FIRES TEND TO SPREAD. The exterior columns were not visibly glowing red hot as they would have had they been above 700 degrees C
So this is what was covered in the first video. Clearly it debunks those idiots and their pancake theories. It's too time consuming to do a break down like this ... I will have to give a brief summary of the others.
GrowRebel
Well-Known Member
Says the dummy that has done nothing other than blow shit out his ass. Notice he doesn't back what he states. Doesn't show where the facts weren't in context. Nothing new there.
CrackerJax
New Member
You can keep trying to bury folks in videos... but it just makes you look more crazy...... 
Quite a little cottage industry conspiracies are....
Boy, they sure hooked you line and sinker....
Quite a little cottage industry conspiracies are....
Boy, they sure hooked you line and sinker....
GrowRebel
Well-Known Member
You mean the videos that make you look like an idiot? ... those videos? ... you mean the ones that have shown facts and science that you can't deny ... those video? I only look crazy to a dumbass like you, which doesn't bother me in the least. In your delusional mind anyone that accept science and facts over the government conspiracy theory is crazy.
Are you hoping that if you keep saying that it will come true? ... it's obvious it isn't ... you've offered no proof ... just shooting your mouth off as usual.
Help this asshole out folks! I appeal to your better nature! Is there ANYONE reading this thread that has paid money for any of the 911 information out there? Anyone?Wow ... I can say the exact same thing about you and the people really behind 911.
That wasn't even a nice try, and you still look like an kiss-ass
Folks I emailed the group who put out the film I posted. I asked if they had a transcript of the movie ... they didn't, but said they would make one for me ... which I thought was most kind. They may even include the pictures that was in the film. Look for that, for those of you that don't like watching videos.
CrackerJax
New Member
No, these vid's don't make ANYONE look like an idiot. They just show us the gullible. People who are easily misled by their pre set prejudices.Keep going GR.... this completely suits you!!!!!
CrackerJax
New Member
There are three ppl.
what... huh?
Active Member
I wish. My faith in people would find itself a little healthier.
GrowRebel
Well-Known Member
Oh yeah it does ... blows your bullshit clean out of the water. It truly exposes you as the idiot you are.
You and the rest of the deniers are the only ones that are gullible. You take the government word over undeniable scientific facts ... now if that's not gullible I don't know what is. You are the one that is prejudice ... against undeniable facts ... get a grip.
And being an idiot suit you!
Wow ... where have you been? Under a rock? Tons of evidence in this thread proving 911 was an inside job.
Bwaa ha ha ha .... I love it when I can show how much you blow shit out your ass ... three people eh? I'll just show the polls that were done on this site.
Recent RIU 911 poll
Another RIU 911 poll
There was another 911 poll done here, but it's so far back I can't find it. Of course I have other polls in the thread showing most people believe 911 was an inside job. So much for your 3 people bullshit. Don't you just love it when I catch you blowing shit out your ass. I certainly do.
OMG! Is that your wife?
Folks while I was looking for polls I found a couple of interesting posts. One was put up a long time ago by med ... check it.
Just a few facts about 911 part 1
part 2 more facts
more facts part 3
More fact part 4
More facts part 5
... and then there is this google video with Aaron Russo before he died, talking about Nick Rockefeller admitting they planned 911.
Rockefeller Admitted Elite Goal Of Microchipped Population
For those that haven't seen this I recommend you watch it. 14 minutes long.
GrowRebel
Well-Known Member
I'm willing to bet that there have been ... I get private emails thanking me for the thread.i wonder how many people have actually changed their opinion based on a post at RIU.
i guess we all gotta do something with our time.
FDD I've been wanting to talk to you about my grow ... would it be inappropriate to PM you about my problem?
what... huh?
Active Member
I did.i wonder how many people have actually changed their opinion based on a post at RIU.
i guess we all gotta do something with our time.
Natrone says that the majority of people he saw killed in Iraq were not foreign insurgents, but native Iraqis... who he sees as defending their homeland from foreign oppressors.
I just sort of looked at it as though we were helping... which is a sort of myopic view. I do not mean to say that we ARE what we may be viewed as... but the notion of defending your homeland vs trying to destroy a free society is a paradigm shift my views took.
you should start a thread. then everybody can learn.
i have changed 100's of people's lives.
looking at my post count you can see what i do with all my time. now i gotta just find a youtube vid to mesh in with all this.
what... huh?
Active Member
[youtube]fbGkxcY7YFU[/youtube]
GrowRebel
Well-Known Member
Check it out folks I found the deniers game plan. Now we know where they get their shit from.
Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth:The Rules of Disinformation
(Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist)
This describes them to a T ... check it out ...
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil
2. Become incredulous and indignant
3. Create rumor mongers
4. Use a straw man
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling, ridicule
6. Hit and Run
7. Question motives
8. Invoke authority
9. Play Dumb
10. Associate opponent charges with old news
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions
12. Enigmas have no solution
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic
14. Demand complete solutions
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses
17. Change the subject
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad
19. Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs
20. False evidence
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor
22. Manufacture a new truth
23. Create bigger distractions
24. Silence critics
25. Vanish
Eight Traits of The Disinformationalist
1. Avoidance
2. Selectivity
3. Coincidental
4. Teamwork
5. Anti-conspiratorial
6. Artificial Emotions
7. Inconsistent
8. Newly Discovered: Time Constant
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well.
Definitely one of their ploys.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
Heard this one before too.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
Sounds like them doesn't it.
Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth:The Rules of Disinformation
(Includes The 8 Traits of A Disinformationalist)
This describes them to a T ... check it out ...
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil
2. Become incredulous and indignant
3. Create rumor mongers
4. Use a straw man
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling, ridicule
6. Hit and Run
7. Question motives
8. Invoke authority
9. Play Dumb
10. Associate opponent charges with old news
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions
12. Enigmas have no solution
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic
14. Demand complete solutions
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses
17. Change the subject
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad
19. Ignore facts, demand impossible proofs
20. False evidence
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor
22. Manufacture a new truth
23. Create bigger distractions
24. Silence critics
25. Vanish
Eight Traits of The Disinformationalist
1. Avoidance
2. Selectivity
3. Coincidental
4. Teamwork
5. Anti-conspiratorial
6. Artificial Emotions
7. Inconsistent
8. Newly Discovered: Time Constant
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well.
Definitely one of their ploys.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
Heard this one before too.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
Sounds like them doesn't it.
GrowRebel
Well-Known Member
Hi folks ... this video clearly shows the explosions going off before the WTC collapsed into it's own footprint. But watch the deniers deny ...
911 Debunked Mystery Explosions EXPOSED
[youtube]qpwRvo0SmMM[/youtube]
Watch very carefully ... they circle the flashes so you can see ... no doubt ... those buildings were demo.
911 Debunked Mystery Explosions EXPOSED
[youtube]qpwRvo0SmMM[/youtube]
Watch very carefully ... they circle the flashes so you can see ... no doubt ... those buildings were demo.
That's REALLY GAY!!!!
GrowRebel
Well-Known Member
Hummm ... I think WH may go both ways ...
Check this out ... I don't know if any of you watch Real Time with Bill Maher, but he has ridiculed the truth movement and they put out a video about it.
I believe Maher is afraid of getting fire again, and there is probably pressure from on high to stick with the government conspiracy theory.
Real Time problems with Bill Maher?
[youtube]s8ZzLLkAjxU[/youtube]
Check this out ... I don't know if any of you watch Real Time with Bill Maher, but he has ridiculed the truth movement and they put out a video about it.
I believe Maher is afraid of getting fire again, and there is probably pressure from on high to stick with the government conspiracy theory.
Real Time problems with Bill Maher?
[youtube]s8ZzLLkAjxU[/youtube]
- Status