9/11 Debate

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Sloth wrote:

SALVATORE D’AGOSTINO, NEW YORK FIRE DEPARTMENT: You could hear the floors pancaking one on top of the other, huge explosions.

LIM: Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, and faster as they get closer. What I remember the most was the wind. It created almost like a hurricane-type force and actually pushed one of the firemen right by me.

Here are some fantastic and rare ground zero pictures taken on 9/13.
http://www.zombietime.com/wtc_9-13-2001/

Here is the big problem though in terms of reverse forensics … the majority of the debris is located outside of the building footprint, rather than concentrated within it. These photos indicate that the mass travelled laterally more so than it travelled vertically given its range of scatter and the LACK OF A CENTRALIZED HEAP AT THE BOTTOM.

“Pancake theory” postulates that the mass of the structure remained intact, moving in a focused manner down the length of the building, as the floor supports rapidly failed one by one, unable to resist the increasing downward force of the accumulating failed floors.

The chief pre-requisite for gravity driven completely symmetrical and vertical “pancake theory” to work is that the mass must remain intact, dense, focused, and perpendicular throughout the collapse in order for its energy to efficiently transfer. Unfortunately what is observed during the collapse is, rather than remain intact, dense, focused, and perpendicular … the mass, in a very un-focused manner, broke apart into voluminous clouds of small unconcentrated particles.
IPB Image
To the degree that the tiny particles that compose this unconcentrated mass are traveling “in a focused manner” … it is clearly much more of a horizontal and outward path rather than in an intact, focused, and perpendicular one.

Second as if the mid-collapse photos contradicting the theory was not enough, the post-collapse photos do not corroborate the theory that the floors remained intact, dense, and focused either. If a vertical pancake had genuinely occured there would be visible stacks of mostly intact floors. Instead, they are quite literally indiscernable if not completely unpresent. Why is there no “pile at the bottom” if the floors remained dense, intact, and focused ?

If floors did it … then where are they ???

This is what it looks like when floors vertically pancake themselves :
[/quote]

You guys can’t make up your minds. Sometimes your folks claim they fell in their footprint, “like in demolition.” Other times, that they didn’t fall in their foot print, which proves something else nefarious. So first, you tell me. Which theory are you going to advance and stick with. Then I’ll debunk it.

Who said the floors remained intact? By the way, that’s just a firefighter describing what he believes he heard. The NIST does NOT attribute the collapse to a pancake theory. The fact you didn’t even know this, something so fundamental, tells me you’ve never considered anything further than what the likes of “Prisonplanet” has told you.

22

420×634 58.2 KB

Why not include these columns, their dimensions, and their redundant functions in their models that “explain it all” ??? This is no accidental oversight.

23

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Here are some examples of them flat out LYING and trying to make it appear authoritative and official sounding!!!

They pretend the buildings were hollow, except floors attached only to the exterior of the building … when reality is that each building had 47 of the world’s largest, most rigid, and most redundant interlocking networks of columns running through the middle of the structure and carrying the bulk of the gravitational load !!!

Here are some construction photos - where the enormous 47 core columns that our government and media told us was not there … are completely visible.[/quote]

I don’t even know what you’re claiming here…

24

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Why not include these columns, their dimensions, and their redundant functions in their models that “explain it all” ??? This is no accidental oversight.[/quote]

Include them in what?

25

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Additionally,

When concrete breaks, it does not turn into powder - it cracks into chunks and pieces.

And yet on 9/11 - concrete turned into powder in the middle of the air … it didn’t just turn into powder … it turned into a lot of powder[/quote]

By the way, how tall is this structure, and did the collapse begin near the top?

26


IPB Image - NIST, includes the core columns but minimizes them to toothpicks.

Most important of all … WTC 7 did not employ the tubular structure design. Even if the towers were to fail for the popularly stated myth of a “fatal flaw” of “unique design” (FEMA’s “Death Star Theory”)… it is fundamentally not an applicable theory for WTC7 since it had no such identical “fatal flaw.”

Lastly examining the conversion of potential energy by competing forces :

The mid-air pulverization of tons of concrete indicates massive and competing forces – incredibly violent collisions between objects. There could not have been both beginning-of-collapse dust clouds (indicating huge, violently-competing forces) AND collapses at virtually free-fall speeds (indicating only small, minor competition of forces and little resistance).

Either the pulverization was caused by some type of explosion, or by the heavy tops of the buildings hitting massive inertial resistance in the form of the lower floors, which were steel-reinforced and solidly bolted into the columns of the steel core.

Likewise, the sideways ejection of heavy steel beams indicates either explosive forces or, at the very least, tremendous resistance by the floors to the downward collapses, thus forcing heavy objects to shoot out sideways.

If the buildings collapsed from any cause other than explosives – which violently blows out all supports of the buildings being demolished – then there would have been a crumpling of the buildings. In that case, there might have generated dust clouds near the end of the collapse, but not towards the very beginning. And, clearly, the collapse would not have approached free-fall speeds, since the intact floors would have put up alot of resistance against the momentum of the falling floors.

The towers collapsed as fast as a house of cards, and yet produced enormous dust clouds from early on in the collapses.

The defenders of the official story of 9/11 can’t have it both ways.

Instead, the towers had to have been brought down with explosives:

The near free-fall speed is easily explained by the demolition of the towers’ support structures, which took away the resistance which should have slowed the collapse time

And

The tremendous dust clouds seen early in the collapses are be explained by the massive explosions caused by pre-set demolition charges which pulverized concrete and shot it out of the towers

People only lie to you this blatantly when they believe that you are so gullible, naive, ignorant, apathetic, and unaware that you will not catch glaring flaws.

27

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
IPB Image - NIST, includes the core columns but minimizes them to toothpicks.

Most important of all … WTC 7 did not employ the tubular structure design. Even if the towers were to fail for the popularly stated myth of a “fatal flaw” of “unique design” (FEMA’s “Death Star Theory”)… it is fundamentally not an applicable theory for WTC7 since it had no such identical “fatal flaw.”

Lastly examining the conversion of potential energy by competing forces :

The mid-air pulverization of tons of concrete indicates massive and competing forces – incredibly violent collisions between objects. There could not have been both beginning-of-collapse dust clouds (indicating huge, violently-competing forces) AND collapses at virtually free-fall speeds (indicating only small, minor competition of forces and little resistance).

Either the pulverization was caused by some type of explosion, or by the heavy tops of the buildings hitting massive inertial resistance in the form of the lower floors, which were steel-reinforced and solidly bolted into the columns of the steel core.

Likewise, the sideways ejection of heavy steel beams indicates either explosive forces or, at the very least, tremendous resistance by the floors to the downward collapses, thus forcing heavy objects to shoot out sideways.

If the buildings collapsed from any cause other than explosives – which violently blows out all supports of the buildings being demolished – then there would have been a crumpling of the buildings. In that case, there might have generated dust clouds near the end of the collapse, but not towards the very beginning. And, clearly, the collapse would not have approached free-fall speeds, since the intact floors would have put up alot of resistance against the momentum of the falling floors.

The towers collapsed as fast as a house of cards, and yet produced enormous dust clouds from early on in the collapses.

The defenders of the official story of 9/11 can’t have it both ways.

Instead, the towers had to have been brought down with explosives:

Ã?¢â?¬Ã?¢ The near free-fall speed is easily explained by the demolition of the towers’ support structures, which took away the resistance which should have slowed the collapse time

And

�¢â?¬�¢ The tremendous dust clouds seen early in the collapses are be explained by the massive explosions caused by pre-set demolition charges which pulverized concrete and shot it out of the towers

People only lie to you this blatantly when they believe that you are so gullible, naive, ignorant, apathetic, and unaware that you will not catch glaring flaws.[/quote]

Link where you quoted this from.

28


No internal columns.

29

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
IPB Image - NIST, includes the core columns but minimizes them to toothpicks.[/quote]

Sorry, but if you are going to pull this shit, you don’t know how buildings are put together, never mind how they come down.

30

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
Sloth wrote:

SALVATORE D’AGOSTINO, NEW YORK FIRE DEPARTMENT: You could hear the floors pancaking one on top of the other, huge explosions.

LIM: Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, and faster as they get closer. What I remember the most was the wind. It created almost like a hurricane-type force and actually pushed one of the firemen right by me.

Here are some fantastic and rare ground zero pictures taken on 9/13.
http://www.zombietime.com/wtc_9-13-2001/

Here is the big problem though in terms of reverse forensics … the majority of the debris is located outside of the building footprint, rather than concentrated within it. These photos indicate that the mass travelled laterally more so than it travelled vertically given its range of scatter and the LACK OF A CENTRALIZED HEAP AT THE BOTTOM.

“Pancake theory” postulates that the mass of the structure remained intact, moving in a focused manner down the length of the building, as the floor supports rapidly failed one by one, unable to resist the increasing downward force of the accumulating failed floors.

The chief pre-requisite for gravity driven completely symmetrical and vertical “pancake theory” to work is that the mass must remain intact, dense, focused, and perpendicular throughout the collapse in order for its energy to efficiently transfer. Unfortunately what is observed during the collapse is, rather than remain intact, dense, focused, and perpendicular … the mass, in a very un-focused manner, broke apart into voluminous clouds of small unconcentrated particles.
IPB Image
To the degree that the tiny particles that compose this unconcentrated mass are traveling “in a focused manner” … it is clearly much more of a horizontal and outward path rather than in an intact, focused, and perpendicular one.

Second as if the mid-collapse photos contradicting the theory was not enough, the post-collapse photos do not corroborate the theory that the floors remained intact, dense, and focused either. If a vertical pancake had genuinely occured there would be visible stacks of mostly intact floors. Instead, they are quite literally indiscernable if not completely unpresent. Why is there no “pile at the bottom” if the floors remained dense, intact, and focused ?

If floors did it … then where are they ???

This is what it looks like when floors vertically pancake themselves :
[/quote]

These would be great but in reality it states on the site that the pictures were taken approximately 10 days post 9/11.

Either way both sides of this discussion are still going to believe what they want to.

31

still good pictures though.

32

“The exercises that went on that morning simulating the exact
kind of thing that was happening so confused the people in the
FAA and NORAD…that they didn’t they didn’t know what was
real and what was part of the exercise. I think the people who
planned and carried out those exercises, they’re the ones that
should be the object of investigation.”
– Retired Air Force Colonel Robert M. Bowman,
former director of the U.S. “Star Wars” space defense

“Those conspiracies that are too incredible to be believed,
are by the same right, those which most often succeed.”
– Marshall McLuhan, philosopher

“In the size of the lie there is always contained a certain
factor of credibility, since the great masses of the people…
will more easily fall victim to a great lie than to a small one.”
– Hitler, Mein Kampf.

“If you tell a big enough Lie, and keep on repeating it, in the
end people will come to believe it.”
– Josef Goebbels, Hitler’s propaganda chief

“Everybody knows that corruption thrives in secret places, and
avoids public places, and we believe it a fair presumption that
secrecy means impropriety.”
– Woodrow Wilson

“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence
that it is not utterly absurd.”
– Bertrand Russell, British mathematician, philosopher

“He who conceals a useful truth is equally guilty with
the propagator of an injurious falsehood.”
– Augustine, Christian philosopher

“It can be held certain that information that is withheld or
suppressed contains truths that are detrimental to the persons
involved in the suppression.”
– J. Edgar Hoover

“The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a
conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists.”
– J. Edgar Hoover

“The essence of the lie implies, in fact, that the liar is
actually in complete possession of the truth which he is
hiding.”
– Jean-Paul Sartre

“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.”
– Aldous Huxley

“It can reasonably be extrapolated that if the entire public
were exposed to independent 9/11 research, about 90 percent
would support a new investigation of the events of that
fateful day.”
– Zogby Poll: Over 70 Million American Adults
Support New 9/11 Investigation

“The Republican Party has been reduced to one principle â?? its
own power. It protects the Bush regime from accountability and
covers up its lies and misdeeds. Under the myths and lies that
enshroud 9/11, the Democrats have collapsed as an opposition
party.”
– Paul Craig Roberts, Chief Economist under Reagon admin.

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed
citizens can change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing
that ever has.”
– Margaret Mead (1901-1978)

33

The slow motion explosives the conspirators used caused the structure to fail over time…

34

More buckling caused, apparently, by slow motion demolitions.

35

With the last photo, that specific area is seen collapsing inwards at the start of global collapse.

Scroll down. It’s the video right after the picture I posted.

36

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
Yes, I enjoy tossing my liberties out the window in exchange for a little warm feeling of safety.

How can you possibly feel safe knowing how easy it is/was to hijack a plane and destroy 3000 lives in an instant?[/quote]

Because deep down in my heart I know that I have much better chances of slipping in the bath tub than being killed in a terrorist attack?

Or choke on a pretzel, die in a car accident, get hit by a meteor…

Statistically speaking, fasten your seatbelt and quit smoking and you will live forever.

37

[quote]Petedacook wrote:
What FEMA, 9/11 Commission, Discovery, PBS, Popular Mechanics, and FEMA have done is called “the big lie” technique, and I am here to play the role of child telling the emperor that he is naked. They make the lie so enormous and shockingly implausible that people conclude it must be true. Who can with any intellectual honesty claim that floors “stacked” themselves when observed reality shows there are no floors stacked at the bottom ? Both buildings have been turned into hollowed out exo-skeletons … with no discernable intact portions of any floors at the bottom of either structure… Again, look at it - exoskeletons and NO heap of floors :

[/quote]

Excellent quote to Jack Herrers book. :slight_smile:

38

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
IPB Image - NIST, includes the core columns but minimizes them to toothpicks.

Sorry, but if you are going to pull this shit, you don’t know how buildings are put together, never mind how they come down.[/quote]

WOW your entire base of arguments is that noone knows what they are talking about. But strangely you do. And strangely you are the Quack expert in how buildings go up and exactly how they come down. I’ll say it again, you evolved in the Caste system. You’re incapable of questioning your spoon feeding masters. Just bow your head with a “yes” to anything they feed you.

39

[quote]orion wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
Yes, I enjoy tossing my liberties out the window in exchange for a little warm feeling of safety.

How can you possibly feel safe knowing how easy it is/was to hijack a plane and destroy 3000 lives in an instant?

Because deep down in my heart I know that I have much better chances of slipping in the bath tub than being killed in a terrorist attack?

Or choke on a pretzel, die in a car accident, get hit by a meteor…

Statistically speaking, fasten your seatbelt and quit smoking and you will live forever.

[/quote]

And flying is STILL the safest mode of travel.

This is always uttered after fatal crashes.

40

[quote]Gregus wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Petedacook wrote:
IPB Image - NIST, includes the core columns but minimizes them to toothpicks.

Sorry, but if you are going to pull this shit, you don’t know how buildings are put together, never mind how they come down.

WOW your entire base of arguments is that noone knows what they are talking about. But strangely you do. And strangely you are the Quack expert in how buildings go up and exactly how they come down. I’ll say it again, you evolved in the Caste system. You’re incapable of questioning your spoon feeding masters. Just bow your head with a “yes” to anything they feed you.
[/quote]

Congratulations on being a jackass. I did not “evolve” in the caste system, it would seem not only are you ignorant of building structures, you can’t read either.