well you certainly aren't far from the Mark. Its called the Polemic style of Debate, I could try Logical argument only, or factual argument only, perhaps I could, but i am not well versed in those styles and it doesn't fit my "argumentative" personality well. So I stick with the Polemic style, it fits me well and it gets my point across, sometimes a bit harsh, but you have thick enough skin IMO. BTW your style of debate is called " Not showing up to the podium".
Do We Dare Discuss 911 With Poll
- Thread starter canuckgrow
- Start date
Actually I was very intrigued by you doing real things....well, maybe i can please you with a 911 youtube video instead.
so, are you winning?
[video=youtube;fvfARuNuGmU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvfARuNuGmU[/video]
Can't say I get the music though, doesn't really fit well with the video, I realize its something you like, but the faster paced music doesn't fit very well to the slow paced video, perhaps if you speed the video up 3 times fast it will work better. either that or get the fucking lead out when you do laundry, sheesh.
C'Mon I know you got a Slayer Video your just dieing to segue into the conversation. DO IT!!
doc111
Well-Known Member
I don't really understand all this hostility.
I never took "skyscraper collapse" classes. I am a retired firefighter. Among the numerous certifications I hold is "Building Collapse Technician". I have a Master's Degree in Chemistry and Building Collapse classes were way harder IMO. It's a really intensive program and most who start it don't graduate. I did not witness the collapse. I didn't get a chance to inspect the damage on building 7 before it collapsed. Why would they demo it, lose zero lives as a result and then not admit to it? I can tell you this. There aren't any firefighters I'm aware of that are trained in demo. And they definitely don't carry explosives on the engine. Where would they find a demo team in a matter of hours that could rig it and successfully bring it down? It would've had to have been rigged prior to the attacks, which would suggest that the whole thing was planned. I don't buy it. That said, who do you think blew up building 7? Why do you think they did it? To hide some documents? Seriously? As for you thinking it would be impossible for the building to sustain significant damage to cause it to collapse????????? I tried explaining how weird stuff happens during catasrophic accidents. I don't know what else I can say. IMO the conspiracy theories just aren't plausible. They defy logic. Especially the explanations for why "They" blew up WTC #7. I'm no expert on conspiracy theories though. Sorry. 
ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
doc111
Well-Known Member
lol! I guess "Minor" could be a relative term?define minor??
bobbypyn
Well-Known Member
oh man... this topic held me captive for quite some time & I have disturbing news. As fervently as I once held the belief that it was a grand conspiracy, I've been forced to rethink my outlook on the matter. You need to start by taking a long hard look at who Alex Jones is. He grew up here where I've lived my whole life; he went to Jesuit High School, but that's not the shady part. The shady part is who REALLY funds infowars; the good ol' John Birch Society, possibly the most right-wing organization in America, and that's saying alot! That's why Jones makes such a hard push on the merchandise; to make it seem as though it's all member funded. Not the case. If you really wanna dig, check out the fiscal disbursements of the JBS over the past 5 years or so. Believe me, I know what a compelling case the presented evidence creates (it LOOKS like a planned demolition, not to mention the dubious case of Building 7) but as absurd as it seems, the only conspiracy was between Cheney & Rumsfeld; by not allowing the scrambling of fighters, simple as that. As much as I WANT to lay this at w's feet, I can no longer do so in clear conscience. I still hate w with an unholy, burning passion but he gets a pass on this one; much to my dismay...
Antidisestablishmentarian
Well-Known Member
The reason one building was hit and destroyed and one was not(re:wtc #7) is the same reason a tornado hits one house and misses another.
Shit happens.
Shit happens.
doc111
Well-Known Member
Thank you! That's exactly the point I was trying to make. I like the tornado analogy. I used car accidents and I think my entire point was missed or ignored. Look, I don't like having things unexplained. I'm an answer seeker but I've learned that there just aren't any logical answers to some of life's mysteries. It sucks, and frustrates me as well. What else frustrates me is all the armchair quarterbacking still going on nearly 10 years after this tragedy. People say the investigation was insufficient. What constitutes "sufficient" investigation of an event of this magnitude? We were kind of in uncharted territory then. There were thousands of tons of debris, possibly millions of tons. How can all that shit possibly be sifted through? I've heard people criticize the fact that some of the steel was quickly melted down and not thoroughly tested. What were they supposed to be testing for? To see that it was in fact steel and behaved exactly like steel given the conditions it was subjected to. Yes, steel is very strong but quickly loses most of its strength when subjected to high temps for even a few minutes. For some reason people act like steel is this indestructable material and can't possibly fail if it's exposed to fire. I've been to many fires and seen melted steel beams and roof trusses. Even when coated with fire resistant material, steel will still melt. That coating only slows it down some. Fire resistant material is rated by how long it can withstand temps of a certain threshold. There is no such thing as fire proof. Everything will combust if exposed to high enough temps. Everything!
cannabisguru
Well-Known Member
I personally think it was a controlled demolition. My uncle works in that field.. and I know for a fact, that in a cramped, big city (such as NY).. for not just ONE.. but for TWO, HUGE fucking buildings.. to come down without taking out ANY other buildings around them.. it HAD to be a controlled demo of SOME sort. There's just no way that, not ONE.. but TWO!! Huge ass buildings (the twin towers) were able to come down without totally destroying any other buildings next to them unless it was done by very experienced controlled demolitionists. Thats impossible.. and my uncle will tell ya the same thing.
Also, I've been with my uncle on a few of his jobs.. so I know how controlled demolitions work. Alot of planning behind a controlled demolition... especially in a cramped huge city like NY. I'm telling ya.. the way the buildings came down.. had EVERY signature of being a controlled demolition.
Want to know why they did the controlled demo?? Because they (the gov.) were scared that if they didn't have a controlled demo.. they were scared that the buildings (once they began to fall) would take out even more buildings within a certain radius of the impact zone. They didn't want that to happen.. they wanted a controlled demo.
Now, I'm kinda torn between all these "theories". Mainly because if you think about the original explanation of why the towers collapsed.. it makes perfect sense. The jet fuel from each airplane... once the planes impacted each building... exploded.. and any remaining fuel of course was burned off by the fire from the impact. While the fuel was being burned off from the fire... the temps inside the buildings (especially near the impact zone) was around 1500`F to 2200`F. Well, when you have those kind of temps... hitting the infrastructure (the skeleton or frame) of the building.. all that steel/iron eventually hit its 'melting point' or 'failure point' and then buildings then began to fail around the impact zone.. which was really close to the tops of both towers. Now, once the steel/iron frames of each building began to melt and fail.. and fall... the weight was just too much for the lower floors on the buildings to hold.. which triggered the "domino effect".. which caused each floor on each tower.. to pretty much crumble into itself.
I mean, there are many theories out there.. but you really have to have an open mind about the issue to really understand that anything could have been possible.
Now, as for the pentagon explosion... yeah, there was no fucking plane. That was a missle.. that was fired from a scrambled F16 that was scrambled out to go after the 3rd plane that was heading towards Washington D.C. (for the Whitehouse I'm guessing). There was NO plane.. period. There was no tail section of the plane sticking out of the impact zone.. and there was absolutely NO wreckage/parts found.. that would have indicated that a plane hit the Pentagon.. period! So, that in my opinion.. wasn't really necessarily an inside job.. but more of a "government fuck up".
There was a site that I had bookmarked (no longer have it.. of course..) but it was the only site I was able to find that actually slowed the video down (from the security camera) frame by frame.. and was actually able to slow it down slow enough, to where you could actually see the tail-fins of a missle.. yes a missle, right as it impacted the side of the pentagon building. So, I know for a fact.. (and all the others that seen this video) that, that was no plane.. and that it was a 'Side-Winder' missle.. which was fired from a military F-16 jet.
Also, for all you 'non believers'... here's a little info that you may have, or may have not known about. When the FBI got to 'ground zero' at the twin towers.. they were there mainly to locate the 'black boxes' (data recorders) from each plane. Well, their official report to the public was... that they never found either one of the black boxes. Which was an outright lie!! They DID find the black boxes.. both of them! And yet, they tell us.. the citizens of the United States of America.. that they were unable to locate the black boxes from either plane. You know why they told everyone that?? Because.. it was an INSIDE job.. and if the information from those black boxes were ever to get out to the media/public... their 'inside job' would have been a failed job.. and who knows what would have happened after that. That's a fact too.. for all you non believers.
The government flat out LIED to its citizens.. and said that they were unable to locate the black boxes. Come on now, an event like that.. on American soil.. and they're just gonna give up.. and tell everyone that they couldn't find the boxes?? Bullshit... they found the black boxes.. and kept it a secret because they didn't want any information from those boxes getting to the media.. or into the wrong hands.. and have their 'inside job' be foiled or exposed. They didn't want the REAL truth to get out... period.
Its pretty sad.. when, here in America.. land of the free.. home of the brave... can't even trust its own government. Its pathetic really.. IMO.
peace.
Also, I've been with my uncle on a few of his jobs.. so I know how controlled demolitions work. Alot of planning behind a controlled demolition... especially in a cramped huge city like NY. I'm telling ya.. the way the buildings came down.. had EVERY signature of being a controlled demolition.
Want to know why they did the controlled demo?? Because they (the gov.) were scared that if they didn't have a controlled demo.. they were scared that the buildings (once they began to fall) would take out even more buildings within a certain radius of the impact zone. They didn't want that to happen.. they wanted a controlled demo.
Now, I'm kinda torn between all these "theories". Mainly because if you think about the original explanation of why the towers collapsed.. it makes perfect sense. The jet fuel from each airplane... once the planes impacted each building... exploded.. and any remaining fuel of course was burned off by the fire from the impact. While the fuel was being burned off from the fire... the temps inside the buildings (especially near the impact zone) was around 1500`F to 2200`F. Well, when you have those kind of temps... hitting the infrastructure (the skeleton or frame) of the building.. all that steel/iron eventually hit its 'melting point' or 'failure point' and then buildings then began to fail around the impact zone.. which was really close to the tops of both towers. Now, once the steel/iron frames of each building began to melt and fail.. and fall... the weight was just too much for the lower floors on the buildings to hold.. which triggered the "domino effect".. which caused each floor on each tower.. to pretty much crumble into itself.
I mean, there are many theories out there.. but you really have to have an open mind about the issue to really understand that anything could have been possible.
Now, as for the pentagon explosion... yeah, there was no fucking plane. That was a missle.. that was fired from a scrambled F16 that was scrambled out to go after the 3rd plane that was heading towards Washington D.C. (for the Whitehouse I'm guessing). There was NO plane.. period. There was no tail section of the plane sticking out of the impact zone.. and there was absolutely NO wreckage/parts found.. that would have indicated that a plane hit the Pentagon.. period! So, that in my opinion.. wasn't really necessarily an inside job.. but more of a "government fuck up".
There was a site that I had bookmarked (no longer have it.. of course..) but it was the only site I was able to find that actually slowed the video down (from the security camera) frame by frame.. and was actually able to slow it down slow enough, to where you could actually see the tail-fins of a missle.. yes a missle, right as it impacted the side of the pentagon building. So, I know for a fact.. (and all the others that seen this video) that, that was no plane.. and that it was a 'Side-Winder' missle.. which was fired from a military F-16 jet.
Also, for all you 'non believers'... here's a little info that you may have, or may have not known about. When the FBI got to 'ground zero' at the twin towers.. they were there mainly to locate the 'black boxes' (data recorders) from each plane. Well, their official report to the public was... that they never found either one of the black boxes. Which was an outright lie!! They DID find the black boxes.. both of them! And yet, they tell us.. the citizens of the United States of America.. that they were unable to locate the black boxes from either plane. You know why they told everyone that?? Because.. it was an INSIDE job.. and if the information from those black boxes were ever to get out to the media/public... their 'inside job' would have been a failed job.. and who knows what would have happened after that. That's a fact too.. for all you non believers.
The government flat out LIED to its citizens.. and said that they were unable to locate the black boxes. Come on now, an event like that.. on American soil.. and they're just gonna give up.. and tell everyone that they couldn't find the boxes?? Bullshit... they found the black boxes.. and kept it a secret because they didn't want any information from those boxes getting to the media.. or into the wrong hands.. and have their 'inside job' be foiled or exposed. They didn't want the REAL truth to get out... period.
Its pretty sad.. when, here in America.. land of the free.. home of the brave... can't even trust its own government. Its pathetic really.. IMO.
peace.
doc111
Well-Known Member
You obviously have NO clue what you are talking about. Several buildings were destroyed when the twin towers came down and several more were damaged severely. So if it was a controlled demo, that would mean that those buildings were rigged weeks or even months prior to the attacks, yes? That would mean that they had every single detail of this thing planned. There is not a demo team on the planet that could go into 2 of the tallest buildings on the planet while they are burning and rig them with explosives within a matter of about an hour and then successfully bring them down. I seriously almost ROFL'd when I read the first part of this post. How did they rig explosives sufficient to bring down 2 of the tallest buildings in the world with nobody being any the wiser? It's obvious to me that critical thinking is in short supply these days. A lot of "experts" have thrown in their $.02 on this subject and it seems that very few of them actually put any real thought into what they are saying. There is almost no way to pull off a conspiracy of this magnitude without something going wrong or at least a few people coming forward to say "I helped bring down the towers" or something to that effect. Not one person, to my knowledge, has come forward and said "I was part of this conspiracy to demo the WTC, while making it look like a terrorist attack". Not one single person that I'm aware of has made this claim. Where are they? Where are all of the people it would've taken to successfully pull this off? Most people can't keep a surprise birthday party a secret. How do you expect hundreds or possibly thousands of people it would've taken to successfully pull this off to all keep their mouths shut? I'm not a wealthy person but I would gladly put up the title to my house and my business if anybody could come forward with REAL evidence that they were somehow involved in this "conspiracy". I'll be willing to bet that I could get a major network to pay HUGE money for this story as well. I'll be patiently waiting.
BTW, here is another link discussing the black boxes. A lot of myths surrounding black boxes as well.
http://911myths.com/index.php/The_Black_Boxes
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Did you feel like the commission report was an accurate account of what happened, Doc?
H2grOw
Active Member
This building did not have its steel melt because it was normal combustibles burning. In the trade center, it was burning jet fuel. There is a HUGE difference in the burning temps of jet fuel versus wood and plastic.Inside job. Steel buildings don't melt and fall down, if they did, this building would have fallen.
Mandarin Hotel in Beijing, burned for over 10 hours, nothing melted. It didn't have Asbestos covered steel beams either. (Asbestos is one of the best heat insulators known to man)
doc111
Well-Known Member
For the most part, yes. Of course there are a lot of unanswered questions and inconsistencies in the report. It's huge! I think it could've been done a lot better than it was but this was a huge undertaking to say the least. Certain things have been classified, which naturally leaves even more questions, especially in conspiracy minded folk. This was an unprecedented event in the history of our species. Certain things cannot be answered and that will make some people skeptical while others, no matter what you tell them, no matter how much hard evidence and proof you show them, they aren't going to believe. I constantly see a lot of the same things being parroted over and over and over and over..................even on different websites, people I talk to in person, people like to say the same things. It's interesting this phenomenon of misinformation travelling faster than actual facts over the internet. People like to say that no skyscraper has ever been brought down by fire alone. This is true and it's still true! The WTC was not brought down by fire alone either! They had jumbo jets filled with fuel flown into them at over 500mph! I noticed someone mentioned the Mandarin Hotel fire. You cannot compare apples to oranges and that's exactly what is happening when you try to compare other high rise fires to the WTC attacks! I try to keep an open mind, even about conspiracies. I have little doubt that some famous conspiracy theories are probably true. I've poured over this, in part because it was my job to do so. In part it was because this hit me hard just like it did most Americans, but being a firefighter it hit me a little harder perhaps. Plus I went to ground zero to help with recovery efforts. I know several FDNY firefighters who were killed. I knew them well and they were like brothers to me. This is personal for me and if I thought the government had perpetrated this horrendous act you wouldn't see me sitting here typing this shit. I'd be out for blood, you can guarantee that shit! I just don't think after all the research I've done on this subject that any of the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 that I am aware of hold up when you really start to scrutinize them. I could be wrong and if I'm shown to be wrong I'll gladly eat some crow. It wouldn't be the first time.
doc111
Well-Known Member
That is categorically incorrect my friend. Progressive pancake collapses are more common than you realize. In eartthquakes, progressive pancake collapses happen all the time. Here are a couple of links.
http://www.firehouse.com/topic/rescue-and-special-ops/building-collapse-operations-part-2
http://www.debunking911.com/collapse.htm
The first website is fireshouse.com. It gives a very stripped down synopsis of what kind of building collapse training nearly every firefighter goes through. I had even more training in building collapse than the average fireman. There is "Building Collapse Awareness and Operations" and there is "Building Collapse Technician". The latter is the certification I hold (still to this day, I might add) and the more intensive of the 2 programs.
The second is a different page from a website I already linked. I chose to link this particular website because I think it does a really good job explaining this stuff.
