Good for you, I'm glad that you have a lot of supporters that won't speak up in an anonymous setting such as this.... :blah: :silly:

Probably because they dont want to have to deal with the hassle of someone who won't look at the facts. What's the point of conversing if you will not be open minded.

He is asking you to look at facts. He wants these facts studied without the bias of political debate..

100% correct. Your reading comprehension is spot on.

Its that DEM vs REP mentality that is tearing at our democracy. Its bad for the country because each is a label that doesn't allow for fresh ideas or ideas that straddle ideologs. It acts as a way to misdirect attention and is often used to constrict what may be good ideas. These political games play to the worst in people.

People naturally want to be part of the "winning team" even to the detriment of their own good. Just look at the rabid loyalty people have to not only political parties, but sports teams as well. I see people go into depresion for a day or even longer when there team loses, but bring up a subject like goverment corruption and I get this blank stare...."Didnt you hear me? My team loss to those lousy (insert team)."

That sports team mentality has been carefully crafted. They even have team colors.. blue and red. I find it all very simple when one party creates a 'talking point' or label for another party or politician. It simplifies it, turning into something its not. Real life, and real problems are much more complex. Sometimes the answers arent simple yes and no and dont fall into either DEM or REP camp. Thats a very real problem.

3 different video angles of 7 falling:

http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html

These images are NOT as clear as the ones on the DVD's BTW, but it is easier than renting a video I guess.

Note how the "penthouse" collapses first, indicating that somehow the interior core columns gave way first, although WTC 7 was not hit by aircraft debris and had no significant fires.

Also look at a edge....it does not sway or wave, but instead falls straight down.

Remember that Larry Silverstein has already admitted that he made the decision to "pull" WTC 7. Compare that collapse with 1 and 2, if you dare.

and suspiciosully Larry silverstein, orignanlly owned only wtc 7, but 3 months before 9/11 he purchased all 7 buildings, and insured them for 7 billion$

I know they deliberately demolished at least one of the buildings in the WTC plaza because it was structurally weakened by the collapse of the towers. I wonder if it was WTC7. That might solve the conspiracy.

A+ for drawing the viewer in within the 1st 2 mins of the film. Im just curious, for those who think it wasn't a conspiracy did the 1st few minutes have you questioning yourself?

At first when i saw this thread, I laughed and said "Yeah right" then i watched the entire video. There were somethings that looked dumb, but other that really got me questioning it.

The post above should be removed from the site. Not only is it bull ____ but I find it offensive. I work for one of the airlines that lost two planes because of those dumb ___ towel heads as well as losing friends and co-workers on those planes. If some idiot wants to voice his opinion he should do it some where else. And if scionlife is ok with it then maybe it is the worst site like everyone says it is

Removing the link from our site will not remove that information from the internet. ScionLife is not the website that is hosting that information and it is available to anyone that discovers it. By removing the entire thread I would be limiting the ability for people to discuss the validity of the information. Obviously many people on our site do not agree with the information presented and have voiced their opinion.

You have offended ME with your stereotypical attack on those of middle-eastern descent. ScionLife's off-topic area is the PERFECT place for people to discuss any non-Scion themed topic. Open your mind and allow people to talk about things that you don't necessarily agree with.

And THANK you for telling me that everyone thinks ScionLife is the "worst site". Reading your grammar and spelling I can tell that you are extremely qualified to assemble reliable and accurate information and deliver it unmolested.

Darren

Oooo.......Snap!

The post above should be removed from the site. Not only is it bull poop but I find it offensive. I work for one of the airlines that lost two planes because of those dumb butt towel heads as well as losing friends and co-workers on those planes. If some idiot wants to voice his opinion he should do it some where else. And if scionlife is ok with it then maybe it is the worst site like everyone says it is

Removing the link from our site will not remove that information from the internet. ScionLife is not the website that is hosting that information and it is available to anyone that discovers it. By removing the entire thread I would be limiting the ability for people to discuss the validity of the information. Obviously many people on our site do not agree with the information presented and have voiced their opinion.

You have offended ME with your stereotypical attack on those of middle-eastern descent. ScionLife's off-topic area is the PERFECT place for people to discuss any non-Scion themed topic. Open your mind and allow people to talk about things that you don't necessarily agree with.

And THANK you for telling me that everyone thinks ScionLife is the "worst site". Reading your grammar and spelling I can tell that you are extremely qualified to assemble reliable and accurate information and deliver it unmolested.

Darren

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

-THE DON

i think that by rule of thumb if ur offended by something u shouldnt be insulting someone that would be offended by that comment u lameass.

I know they deliberately demolished at least one of the buildings in the WTC plaza because it was structurally weakened by the collapse of the towers. I wonder if it was WTC7. That might solve the conspiracy.

Actually, I feel that if your statement was true, it would raise even more questions such as:


1) According to Chapter 5 of FEMA's Building Performance Study , firefighters were never in the building: "Preliminary indications were that, due to lack of water, no manual firefighting actions were taken by FDNY." Silverstein's statement implies a close temporal proximity between "that decision to pull" and "watch[ing] the building collapse," giving no time for the fires to become more severe and do what fires have never before done: cause the total collapse of a steel-frame high-rise.

2) Rigging a building with explosives takes weeks (minimum) to months to accomplish. That means the bulding would have been rigged in advance of an attack that no one knew was coming (hmmm.......)

3) The building had several areas of fire -- hardly conditions under which a demolitions team could be expected to lay high explosives.

However, if we imagine that the "decision to pull" had been made before 9/11/01, Silverstein's comment makes sense as an admission that there had been a deliberate decision to demolish the building.

The Search for Truth goes on....

The Karl Schwarz group has found that the US plans for what has come to be known as 9/11 because of its date and its aftermath of ongoing wars originated in the Clinton Administration. Gore, Kerry, Clintons, Kennedy, Liberman et al join with the NY Times to hide the 9/11 photos and analysis:

http://rense.com/general69/thethreereasons.htm

Not surprisingly the Pentagon Reconstruction was also started during that Administration (1997). A portion was specially reinforced to take a airliner hit and 'just happened' to have had few workers in that area on 9/11:

http://www.ftmeade.army.mil/SoundOFF/archives
/SO2002/May02/html/05-02News-pentagon.htm

On 9/10 curiously it was announced that $2.3 Trillion in Pentagon funds was MIA:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml
and http://www.rense.com/general69/depart.htm


Patriots Bronco Bingham and attorney Scott Hodes continue their battle with the FBI to pry loose the 85 videos from the security cameras galore in the Pentagon vicinity:

http://www.flight77.info/00new/85reply.jpg

Find the Appeal of the FBI Denial:

http://www.flight77.info/00new/appeal2.jpg
http://www.flight77.info/

Previously an engine was identified from debris in front of the Pentagon as a JT8D. This engine powered early versions of the Boeing 737-100 and 737-200 airliners and could have been installed on latter versions:








Read the RENSE article, Missing Pentagon Jet Engine Identified,

http://www.rense.com/general63/ident.htm

that compared the found engine with an Boeing 727 JT8D engine on display at the Museum of Science & Industry in Chicago.

As engine parts are made of heavy steel alloys several were found and identified at the Pentagon. This is a damaged fan hub assembly from a JT8D:





This cherry JT8D fan hub assembly is a dead ringer:






The heaviest body part found at the Pentagon was a half ton landing gear main support.





It also is a dead ringer for the main support of this Boeing 737 landing gear:





Former USMC aviator Terry Morin working as a contractor at the BMDO offices at the old Navy Annex identified the airliner as a Boeing 737:

"The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldn't be sure. It looked like a 737 and I so reported to authorities."

http://www.coping.org/911/survivor/pentagon.htm
This graphic discussing the large number of surplus Boeing 737's circa 9/11 suggests the weapons of choice on 9/11 probably were sold at bargain basement prices:





Sibel Edmonds, FBI whistleblower, discovered the can of worms that financed 9/11 but has been gagged by Bush who ordered 9/11 carried out by the CIA and the US Navy:

http://www.justacitizen.com/

Gary Potter reports on that can of worms in his article, Organized Crime, The CIA and the Savings and Loan Scandal:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA/S&L_Scandal_CIA.html

In 2000 the 2 biggest sources of opium were Burma and Afghanistan. However in 2000 the victorious Taliban decided to destroy the opium poppy crop (notwithstanding its considerable financial importance) and before the US invasion in 2001 it had been virtually all destroyed. However the US victory meant that by 2002 Afghanistan under US guns had regained its previous important position as a major World opium producer:

http://www.rense.com/general68/fab.htm

The FBI has a flock of 9/11 Boeing 737 engines stashed away in 'investigative files': Two from the Pentagon, one from the alleged Flight 93 crash, and this CFM56 engine identified on a NYC street after the South Tower crash:






The Power Hour radio show has confirmed our research that the NYC street engine from the South Tower crash was a CFM56 from a Boeing 737 and that Flight 175, a Boeing 767, did not hit the South Tower:
http://www.rense.com/general69/175.htm

In addition, the Power Hour has found that Pentagon 9/11 'witnesses' were given prepared written statements to say that a commercial airliner hit the Pentagon" when in fact they had no knowledge of the fact or knew it was false. They interviewed a former Pentagon insider working there on 9/11 who presented damaging evidence that the military brass lied about what type of aircraft actually struck the Pentagon. Reporter Greg Szymanski concluded that by following orders from the Pentagon brass, Pentagon worker Flowers provides even more evidence that the government was involved in causing 9/11 and the resulting deaths of more than 3,000 people.

http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/article/1518131/39024.htm

The Power Hour has requested identification of the object hidden under a tarp, the start of the 'coverup' of 9/11 Pentagon activity, but light enough to be carried by Pentagon staff so clearly it wasn't a heavy Boeing 767 wing. Of course if it was there would be no need to cover it up just like the 85 Pentagon videos:





The Sugano Experiment showed what happens to the wings of an aluminum aircraft striking a masonry barrier similar to the Pentagon foot and a half thick masonry walls. Remember the Pentagon walls were specially reinforced in anticipation of 9/11. Finding the wings and engine in front of the Pentagon is proof positive that the aircraft hit the thick masonry wall and collapsed not entering the Pentagon. It carried explosive charges that blew it to bits shortly after impact. The bits rained down for blocks around. This is what the FBI knows the 85 videos will show along with the aircraft being a Boeing 737 and not a Boeing 757, the aircraft of alleged Flight 77. So where is Barbara Olson today?




FROM: http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/video-gallery/index.html

NO NEED to tell RENSE readers that the Pentagon staff is covering up a Boeing 737 wing.

Hat's off to premier 9/11 librarian and whistleblower Web Fairy's article, 150+ 9/11 Smoking Guns Found in the Mainstream Media:

http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

Note the paucity of NYTimes links as they continue their coverup of the Federal Government mass murder of 3000 of their subscribers. Jessie of www.tvnewslies.com who carries the RENSE 9/11 articles has a response: Hey NY Times: Go to Hell You Criminal Bastards!:

http://tvnewslies.org/blog/?p=171

For different slants on the Pentagon 9/11 story:

1) http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/citizen_grand_jury.html
Top-notch reporter Chris Bollyn, Web Fairy, Sherman Skolnick, Greg Szymanski, Phil Jayhan, and myself all from Chicago. We model our work after Sherman Skolnick who still leads the way on 9/11.

2) http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ppfinal.html
Web Fairy said this site was promoting the photo of a piece of metal (see link) circa 9/11 to many Internet sites as the 'proof' that Flight 77 actually hit the Pentagon. It doesn't fit anywhere on a Boeing 757. Many analysts have tried. For homework, RENSE readers can try to fit it on a Boeing 737. However, American Airlines has NO Boeing 737 aircraft in their livery. Apparently the Boeing 737 that struck the Pentagon had a brand-new AA paintjob just for 9/11!

:yawn:

:yawn:

Some people don't mind eating whatever is put on their plate. I choose to go through the food line putting on my plate the foods that I want.

Enjoy yourself while sleeping through reality.

OK conspiracy boy.

What are you going to do about it anyway. Yes Bush is evil. Karl Rove is satan and Paul Wolfowitz is the anti-Christ. Oh well. The morons in this country already put these sacks of crap in office TWICE. There is not a damn thing you can do about the country being hijacked so what's the point in hyping up baseless conspiracy sites.

If you want to do something about it, kill some Republicans on their way to the polls next time around.

OK conspiracy boy..

Conspiracy boy?!?!?? Im not the one who thinks some kids from the Mid-East took down the towers with airplanes. THAT is the true conspiracy.


What are you going to do about it anyway.... There is not a damn thing you can do about the country being hijacked so what's the point in hyping up baseless conspiracy sites..

Wrong. Be a good little sheep. Go back to sleep and never mind the words that may appear on the screen. Whatever you do, dont investigate things yourself. Simply trust and obey....you will be rewarded....

Your mentality (and hundreds of thousands of more Americans just like you) are the reason we are f**ked as a country.

Again, I URGE you, whatever you do, DONT INVESTIGATE THE CASE YOURSELF. Eat. Sleep. Obey. Never question, just consume.

Now, whats on tv? :rofl:

heathen. you are truly nuts. go and join some anarchy now cult and make this country un- "f**ked".


allrighty. bye!

heathen. you are truly nuts. go and join some anarchy now cult and make this country un- "f**ked".


allrighty. bye!

Well, if being "sane" means being a line-towing, unthinking dolt like yourself, than nuts I am.

I would LOVE to hear an attack on the theory I am presenting rather than grade-school name calling, but I suppose that would take an intelligent thought process on your part.



"Again, I URGE you, whatever you do, DONT INVESTIGATE THE CASE YOURSELF. Eat. Sleep. Obey. Never question, just consume.

Now, whats on tv? :rofl: "

Not a conspiracy. An unfortunate event in our great nation's history. What's more unfortunate is the fact that
people have enough hate for one man (Bush) to make this ____ up. Modern technology makes it SO easy to manufacture "proof" to fit whatever ridiculous story these douchebags come up with.

What sucks is that there are so many sheep following them...48 so far on this site alone...you throw that word around, but you never think to apply it to yourselves. Sheep...yeah, sheep. Blind followers. Kick, holler, scream to question, but don't bother questioning both sides. Blindly follow people like Michael Moore, but don't bother to hear when every single one of his ridiculous "theories" are shot down by multiple sources. "He showed a quote on the screen, AND HE USED QUOTATION MARKS, SO IT MUST BE TRUE!!!!!"

You all need to step back & realize something, because your anti-Bush attitudes are going a bit too far:

George W. Bush doesn't have totalitarian control over this country...he's only the top man in a government made up of hundreds of men & women. Maybe if you put as much effort into understanding the U.S. government as you do bashing it, you'd already know this.

What does that mean? A lot, but for this argument, mainly this:

If John Kerry had been elected last year (I shudder at the thought), that would have been a handful of people changing...the rest of the government - the House reps, Senate reps & Congress, the vast majority of which voted FOR going to war, FOR the Patriot Act, FOR the NCLB Act - would all still be there. You DID know that the President can't just arbitrarily go to war, right? You DID know that every single one of the things the Left _____es about was voted on and PASSED by HUNDREDS of people on the hill, right?

I thought not. Try opening a book once in a while.

heathen. you are truly nuts. go and join some anarchy now cult and make this country un- "f**ked".


allrighty. bye!

Well, if being "sane" means being a line-towing, unthinking dolt like yourself, than nuts I am.

I would LOVE to hear an attack on the theory I am presenting rather than grade-school name calling, but I suppose that would take an intelligent thought process on your part.



"Again, I URGE you, whatever you do, DONT INVESTIGATE THE CASE YOURSELF. Eat. Sleep. Obey. Never question, just consume.

Now, whats on tv? :rofl: "

i call you nuts for being out of the fricken planet with your thinking and yet you call me "unthinking dolt"


whatever works for you mr anarchy!. have fun un f**king this country .

Heathnbrewing may be out of his mind, a consipracy addled nut, but think for yourself. Look at the facts. If you don't have the facts, research.

One thing worth applauding Heathen on is he has done research and made his own educated guess on the subject. No one else here has. Or, if they have, they haven't come forward.

Personally, I believe that there is more going on than what we're being told. That doesn't make me a sheep, it means I don't take things at face value.

Reading a lot of the crap in this thread makes me think that a lot of the respondees are those that xActly mentioned: the sheep.

Ask yourselves the important questions and make your own decisions, forget everything and everyone else and figure it out yourself.

Then again, if you don't have the time or don't particularly care, maybe you should keep your respective comments to yourself.

Enough with the mudslinging.

Not a conspiracy. An unfortunate event in our great nation's history. What's more unfortunate is the fact that
people have enough hate for one man (Bush) to make this poop up. Modern technology makes it SO easy to manufacture "proof" to fit whatever ridiculous story these douchebags come up with.

What sucks is that there are so many sheep following them...48 so far on this site alone...you throw that word around, but you never think to apply it to yourselves. Sheep...yeah, sheep. Blind followers. Kick, holler, scream to question, but don't bother questioning both sides. Blindly follow people like Michael Moore, but don't bother to hear when every single one of his ridiculous "theories" are shot down by multiple sources. "He showed a quote on the screen, AND HE USED QUOTATION MARKS, SO IT MUST BE TRUE!!!!!"

You all need to step back & realize something, because your anti-Bush attitudes are going a bit too far:

George W. Bush doesn't have totalitarian control over this country...he's only the top man in a government made up of hundreds of men & women. Maybe if you put as much effort into understanding the U.S. government as you do bashing it, you'd already know this.

What does that mean? A lot, but for this argument, mainly this:

If John Kerry had been elected last year (I shudder at the thought), that would have been a handful of people changing...the rest of the government - the House reps, Senate reps & Congress, the vast majority of which voted FOR going to war, FOR the Patriot Act, FOR the NCLB Act - would all still be there. You DID know that the President can't just arbitrarily go to war, right? You DID know that every single one of the things the Left _____es about was voted on and PASSED by HUNDREDS of people on the hill, right?

I thought not. Try opening a book once in a while.

Conspiracy or not , you should be open minded enough to not call people voicing their opinions douchebags. Yes there is alot of anti-bush presence here but also supporters, because like everything else in the world. there are two sides of it.

If modern technology makes it so easy to manufacture "proof", why couldn't it be the other way around, such as the government & media fabricating what is true and what isn't. Don't call us sheeps because we hate bush and believe that this was a government involved event. Those "douchebags" are the ones that research for evidence to support their theories while you throw your personal opinion out to bash on these people.

If Bush doesn't have totalitarian control over our country, why is that as the years past, the US seems more of a totalitarian country. We don't have the privacy that we once had, all of our taxes are spent on the military ( just like a totalitarian country ). I don't know about you but i feel like the gov't is running our lives.

It's not hard to get hundreds of men and women to follow you, with the right amount of $ ( Bribes ) , favors.. they all can vote for Bush wanted.

If MTV can brainwash kids, what difference would it be with the power of media.

I for one was raged over the "terrorist" when 9-11 happened because like most of us, we were glued on the t.v. waiting for updates. I then heard the other side of it and reviewing everything , i believe that this whole event was government related. :relief:

you know.. until you all have the clearences to find out the truth you should all probably realize that you do not know it. I mean seriously, some people do know and wont talk about it.

You can keep thinking whatever you want, and your opinions are your own, but be careful about what you say.

9-11 was a trajedy and we need to remember all of those that have passed. We need to come together as a nation and help each other, not try and state that everything that happens in this world is a conspiracy. It happened, its over, now lets remember those passed and keep it from happening again.

OK conspiracy boy..

Conspiracy boy?!?!?? Im not the one who thinks some kids from the Mid-East took down the towers with airplanes. THAT is the true conspiracy.


What are you going to do about it anyway.... There is not a damn thing you can do about the country being hijacked so what's the point in hyping up baseless conspiracy sites..

Wrong. Be a good little sheep. Go back to sleep and never mind the words that may appear on the screen. Whatever you do, dont investigate things yourself. Simply trust and obey....you will be rewarded....

Your mentality (and hundreds of thousands of more Americans just like you) are the reason we are f**ked as a country.

Again, I URGE you, whatever you do, DONT INVESTIGATE THE CASE YOURSELF. Eat. Sleep. Obey. Never question, just consume.

Now, whats on tv? :rofl:

OK you've investigated. Now, what are you going to DO about it?

That's great you have all this arcane "knowledge" now. What's it doing for you? Are you going to make even one damn iota of a difference about it?

BTW buying into every conspiracy theory that crosses your path makes you just as f-cking gullible and you seem to think everyone else is, genius. :rofl:

Again, I ask. WHAT are you doing about all this miraculous information you've uncovered about the 9/11 plot? Are you really naive enough to think you are going to have any effect on the neo-conservative cabal that is running this country into the ground? Good luck with that, smart guy.

BTW buying into every conspiracy theory that crosses your path makes you just as f-cking gullible and you seem to think everyone else is, genius.


Please clarify for me which other conspiracy theories Hethenbrewing spoke of other than his theory of Sept 11th. I don't recall them.

Not a conspiracy. An unfortunate event in our great nation's history. What's more unfortunate is the fact that
people have enough hate for one man (Bush) to make this poop up. Modern technology makes it SO easy to manufacture "proof" to fit whatever ridiculous story these douchebags come up with..

This is not about a political party bias. This is about what really happened. I think those that died deserve the truth.

What sucks is that there are so many sheep following them...48 so far on this site alone...you throw that word around, but you never think to apply it to yourselves...

Polls show more than 60% of Americans think we are being lied to about 9/11. Seems like you and those who share your beliefs are in the minority.

Sheep...yeah, sheep. Blind followers. Kick, holler, scream to question, but don't bother questioning both sides. Blindly follow people like Michael Moore, but don't bother to hear when every single one of his ridiculous "theories" are shot down by multiple sources. "He showed a quote on the screen, AND HE USED QUOTATION MARKS, SO IT MUST BE TRUE!!!!!"..

Actually, I was one of those Americans glued to the tv thinking we should seek revenge as soon as possible. Then I put aside my emotions and took a look at the facts and events of 9/11. I hope you can do the same.

Alright, I'll rephrase. Buying into every 9/11 conspiracy that crosses your path makes him just as f_cking gullible as he seems to think everyone else is.

I love how people who find a handful of consipracy crap on the internet think they are brilliant free-thinking geniuses that see something the rest of the "sheep" don't.

You have to pick and choose what you gather from these things, just like you do from the mainstream media. Putting MORE confidence in conspiracy sites than regular media that actually has some standards and isn't run by crank-addicted nerds living in their mom's basements is the height of ignorance.

By all means, be objective and use multiple sources for your information about what is happening in the world, but I would say investigate reputable blogs and foreign media before you start trusting in conspiracy obsessed websites for your world view.

OK you've investigated. Now, what are you going to DO about it?

The same thing I have been doing for years....give viewings at coffee shops and colleges, continue doing my research, updating and creating informational DVD's (since the easiest way to reach the populace is through a medium they all know and love), sending said DVD's to open minded individuals, challenge J. Q. Six-pack when he speaks of "conspiracy" theories such as planes causing WTC 7 to collapse.....I could go on but I think you get the point.

Wow. You are so smart. We are all impressed. Really.

Alright, I'll rephrase. Buying into every 9/11 conspiracy that crosses your path makes him just as f_cking gullible as he seems to think everyone else is..

Actually, I put to rest many of the theories that are hurting the 9/11 Truth Movement...such as flying saucers, missiles, pods under aircraft and the like.

It comes down to one thing (once again), WTC 7.

I love how people who find a handful of consipracy crap on the internet think they are brilliant free-thinking geniuses that see something the rest of the "sheep" don't..

Nope, I did my own research. Have you done yours? I would love to here you back up the goverments claims on the 9/11.

You have to pick and choose what you gather from these things, just like you do from the mainstream media. Putting MORE confidence in conspiracy sites than regular media that actually has some standards and isn't run by crank-addicted nerds living in their mom's basements is the height of ignorance..

Yeah, companies like BBC, CNN and CSPAN are pretty much in moms basement... :rofl:

By all means, be objective and use multiple sources for your information about what is happening in the world, but I would say investigate reputable blogs and foreign media before you start trusting in conspiracy obsessed websites for your world view.

Im sure you, like a lot of "Americans" have watched the evening news and thought, "that sounds right to me". But have you researched? Until you have, I must say that you are ignorant of all the facts regarding, specifically, WTC 7.

This is not about a political party bias. This is about what really happened. I think those that died deserve the truth.


Too bad they may never get it. If there is a vast conspiracy here a bunch of internet nerds with no credibility aren't going to blow the lid off it. If anyone does it will be the mainstream media you are so fond of knocking. Nobody beleives people like you except sheep who choose to follow an "alternative" shepard because it's cool to do so.


Polls show more than 60% of Americans think we are being lied to about 9/11. Seems like you and those who share your beliefs are in the minority.


Most Americans voted for Bush too. That should tell you that "most Americans" have no idea what the f*ck is going on.


Actually, I was one of those Americans glued to the tv thinking we should seek revenge as soon as possible. Then I put aside my emotions and took a look at the facts and events of 9/11. I hope you can do the same.

So why don't you sum up your theory about what happened on 9/11 in 300 words or less for those of us who don't care to read all the crap on the 47 URL's you posted. I'd be interested to hear who you think was flying those planes and why explosive charges were loaded in all these buildings and planes and whatever the hell else you are talking about. It should be entertaining, if not enlightening.

Wow. You are so smart. We are all impressed. Really.
Impressed or not, at least I can approach things without a closed mind. Can you?

The moment we begin to fear the opinions of others and hesitate to tell the truth that is in us, and from motives of policy are silent when we should speak, the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls.

-Elizabeth Cady Stanton


All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

-Arthur Schopenhauer

So why don't you sum up your theory about what happened on 9/11 in 300 words or less.....

WTC 7 was brought down with explosives. Now compare the collapse of 7 to 1 and 2. WTC 1 and 2 were also brought down with explosives.

I never claimed to have all the answers (yet) but I do know that the theory offered up by our goverment is much more the conspiracy theory than the theory I put out there.

I don't necessarily buy the governments version of events outright, but until I hear some practical evidence to suspect otherwise I am assuming the truth is something close to what we are being told, yes. The problem with the conspiracy theories is you need to back them up with a motive in order for them to have any relevance at all.

If you want people to really think about your theories on this, why not summarize them here breifly, since no one is going to read all those links. I'd especially like to hear what you think the governments motivation might be for this big cover-up and what precisely they would gain from doing what you accuse them of.

WHY and HOW would explosives be either in the WTC or on the planes?

WHY would they blow up WTC 7?

What is the motivation there? It makes no sense at all. What leads you to conclude that 1 and 2 were destroyed by explosives in the first place? Did you see the Nova special or any of the many other programs explaining exactly how the towers collapsed? Or do you think they are all part of the vast conspiracy?

I don't necessarily buy the governments version of events outright, but until I hear some practical evidence to suspect otherwise I am assuming the truth is something close to what we are being told, yes. The problem with the conspiracy theories is you need to back them up with a motive in order for them to have any relevance at all.

If you want people to really think about your theories on this, why not summarize them here breifly, since no one is going to read all those links. I'd especially like to hear what you think the governments motivation might be for this big cover-up and what precisely they would gain from doing what you accuse them of.

All of what I have said has been backed up. You said it yourself, you have no interest in clicking links, so there is not a lot I can do for you if you dont want to research. I have gone as far as to provide the links, eliminating possible hours of research trying to find them yourself. Now you want a 300 word summary of the events so you can attack that. Anything to get out of doing the work yourself, huh?

WHY and HOW would explosives be either in the WTC or on the planes?

WHY would they blow up WTC 7?

What is the motivation there? It makes no sense at all. What leads you to conclude that 1 and 2 were destroyed by explosives in the first place? Did you see the Nova special or any of the many other programs explaining exactly how the towers collapsed? Or do you think they are all part of the vast conspiracy?


theres no way its a consipracy... but, as far as their motivation IF they blew it up, maybe it was a way to get the public to not mind going to war

WHY and HOW would explosives be either in the WTC or on the planes??

I never said there were explosives on the planes.

As previously explained, the person to ask is Larry Silverstein. He told the fire dept. to "pull" the buildings.

WHY would they blow up WTC 7???

The towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements, most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to be health hazards in the years since the towers were built. Other New York developers had been driven into bankruptcy by the costly mandated renovations, and $200 million represented an entire year's worth of revenues from the World Trade Towers.

Instead of renovation, Silverstein is rebuilding, funded by the insurance coverage on the property which 'fortuitously' covered acts of terrorism. Even better, Silverstein filed TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy, based on the two, in Silverstein's view, separate attacks. The total potential payout is $7.1 billion, more than enough to build a fabulous new complex and leave a hefty profit for the Silverstein Group, including Larry Silverstein himself.


What is the motivation there? It makes no sense at all. What leads you to conclude that 1 and 2 were destroyed by explosives in the first place? Did you see the Nova special or any of the many other programs explaining exactly how the towers collapsed? Or do you think they are all part of the vast conspiracy?

Have you even watched them collapse? Watch them again.

Regarding NOVA, why do you put so much faith into a "documentary" that does not name names, refuses to show the vertical core columns instead showing them as flat floors, Eagars comments saying that the building were "mostly air", the animation showing only the cross trusses and not the perpendicular trusses.....

NOVAs special is as relevant as the 9/11 commission report.

Dont take that video at face value...research what they are saying. Find out if it is true. I have, and I can assure you it is not.

theres no way its a consipracy... but, as far as their motivation IF they blew it up, maybe it was a way to get the public to not mind going to war

Grand events like assasinations, coups, etc. that are political or socioeconomic in scale and scope can have a host of planned effects globally that may not be apparent or even seen to completion for years.

An immediate reaction to a planned event (like war was to 9/11) may not be the ultimate result that was intended, however the event itself may be a large piece of a much bigger puzzle.

To not have all the answers about why someone may have had a hand in 9/11 means that we cannot form a working theory as to it's alleged purposes or how it would play in the larger picture. Our govt. (CIA) has bankrolled both sides of many conflicts for years, that lends some credence to the thought that it is plausible someone in our govt may have had a hand in 9/11- even if it was inadvertent.

Things like this tend to fall into a category of "games governments play" and a true aftermath or implication probably won't be played out with imbedded reporters on CNN. Sometimes we wag the dog, and war is a distraction. A problem we have is not looking at the big picture and our historical place in it.

WTC 7 was brought down with explosives. Now compare the collapse of 7 to 1 and 2. WTC 1 and 2 were also brought down with explosives.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I love how people say this crazy sheite as if it's fact...

How about if I just speak your language...I'll post a website & expect you to believe everything on it:

http://ourworld-top.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm

Now go put your tinfoil hat back on before big brother steals your thoughts.

This is not about a political party bias. This is about what really happened. I think those that died deserve the truth.

Actually, that's EXACTLY what all this is about...if you think otherwise, YOU are the ignorant one.

Polls show more than 60% of Americans think we are being lied to about 9/11. Seems like you and those who share your beliefs are in the minority.

Polls also showed Kerry winning by a large margin...and look what happened. You know why? Because the VAST majority of left wingers LOVE to scream & protest & spend all their time taking these polls, while those of us occupying the right don't bother with any of it until it's time to do something REAL...like VOTE. How, then, can you possibly think any of those polls are even CLOSE to accurate?

WTC 7 was brought down with explosives. Now compare the collapse of 7 to 1 and 2. WTC 1 and 2 were also brought down with explosives.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

I love how people say this crazy sheite as if it's fact...

How about if I just speak your language...I'll post a website & expect you to believe everything on it:

http://ourworld-top.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm

Now go put your tinfoil hat back on before big brother steals your thoughts.

Nice try but where on that site is there an explaination on how WTC 7 collapsed?

This is not about a political party bias. This is about what really happened. I think those that died deserve the truth.

Actually, that's EXACTLY what all this is about...if you think otherwise, YOU are the ignorant one.

Back to the name calling...so typical.
HOW DID WTC 7 COLLAPSE? I would love to hear your thoughts on that.


Polls show more than 60% of Americans think we are being lied to about 9/11. Seems like you and those who share your beliefs are in the minority.

Polls also showed Kerry winning by a large margin...and look what happened. You know why? Because the VAST majority of left wingers LOVE to scream & protest & spend all their time taking these polls, while those of us occupying the right don't bother with any of it until it's time to do something REAL...like VOTE. How, then, can you possibly think any of those polls are even CLOSE to accurate?
Then explain to me HOW WTC 7 collapsed then. FEMA couldn’t do it. The 9/11 (c)ommision report couldn’t.
How do YOU think it fell?

....Things like this tend to fall into a category of "games governments play" and a true aftermath or implication probably won't be played out with imbedded reporters on CNN. Sometimes we wag the dog, and war is a distraction. A problem we have is not looking at the big picture and our historical place in it.

Exactly!
To me it is not as important to find out who did it and why, but the impact said events will have on the world as a whole. Most of the times things are not black or white, but multiple shades of grey

HOW DID WTC 7 COLLAPSE? I would love to hear your thoughts on that.

Sticking to one thing, thinking it impossible to refute, without researching it for yourself...so typical.

ok, here you go...next time, try google...it's all out there, all you have to do is REALLY want to look for it instead of stopping when you hear what you WANT to hear.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

ok, here you go...next time, try google...it's all out there, all you have to do is REALLY want to look for it instead of stopping when you hear what you WANT to hear.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

Haha!
You should really follow your own advice! That carries about as much weight as the 9/11 commision report and NOVA's documentary long ago debunked.

PM's article debunked: http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/index.html#planes

The article you link to makes no mention to the following:

The towers fell straight down through themselves maintaining radial symmetry,
The towers' tops mushroomed into vast clouds of pulverized concrete and shattered steel.
The collapses exhibited demolition squibs shooting out of the towers well below the zones of total destruction.
The collapses generated vast dust clouds that expanded to many times the towers' volumes -- more than occurs in typical controlled demolitions.
The towers came down suddenly and completely, at a rate only slightly slower than free fall in a vacuum. The flat top of the North Tower's rubble cloud revealed in these photos show the rubble falling at the same speed inside and outside the former building's profile, an impossibility unless demolition were removing the building's structure ahead of the falling rubble.
The explosions of the towers were characterized by intense blast waves that shattered windows in buildings 400 feet away.
The steel skeletons were consistently shredded into short pieces which could be carried easily by the equipment used to dispose of the evidence.
Eyewitnesses reported explosions before and at the outset of the collapses.

And once again, you have not mentioned how YOU think 7 fell. We can post linkls all day long but, again, I ask you, HAVE YOU RECENTLY WATCHED THE COLLAPSE OF THOSE TOWERS?

We can quote others all we want, but a picture is worth a thousand words. Watch the videos and THEN get back to me.

RANDOM THOUGHT:

There is an interesting part at the beginning of the movie Braveheart - "I shall tell you of William Wallace. Historians from England will say I am a liar, but history is written by those who have hanged heroes."

That statement is very true.

Another arguement against the Tower 7 conspiracy:

The conspiracy theorists also focus on Tower 7, for two reasons. One is the usual argument from incredulity that, since the building wasn't directly hit, they can't think of why it should have collapsed. The other is a video of Larry Silverstein saying to "pull" the tower, which they say means he ordered the destruction of the tower.

Tower 7 was not hit by any airplane, but the damage to the main towers did cause both structural damage and fires to it. An analysis of the steel from the ruins of the tower shows that the steel had a high content of sulphur, which can happen when steel is misforged. The sulphur, in addition to burning on its own, also lowered the temperature at which the steel would soften and melt.

As for Silverstein's comments, he was relating a conversation he had had with fire officials in determining whether or not to save the tower. He had said that they had "made the decision to pull it." The conspiracy theorists take that comment out of context, and point out that "pull" is used by building demoloshers to mean bringing down a building. Regardless of whether or not this is true, Silverstein is not a building demolosher, and he was speaking to firefighters, not building demolishers. When firefighters use the word "pull," they mean to pull out all of the firefighters and equipment and let the fire run its course. Silverstein's later comments clarify that this is exactly what he meant.

http://www.skepticwiki.org/wiki/index.php/9/11_coverup

Nice...a thought out rebuttal. Thank you. I really do mean that.



Tower 7 was not hit by any airplane, but the damage to the main towers did cause both structural damage and fires to it.

How did the damage to 1 and 2 cause structural damage to a building more than a block away? It was not hit by an airplane, nor was it seriously battered by debris from the Towers (compared to closer buildings) but it did have two small fires of uncertain origin.

Official reports suggest that fires in WTC7 had been "raging out-of-control" all day, but there is no photographic evidence of this. Several clear images from the moment of onset of the collapse do not even show emergent flames, let alone any other evidence of a huge all-consuming inferno.

WTC7 came down in 6.5 seconds, imploding perfectly within its footprint, simultaneously collapsing straight downward from all points and looking just like a perfect controlled demolition.

The straight-down, vertical collapse of Building 7 could not have happened and with such perfect symmetry unless all 58 perimeter columns and all 25 core columns somehow were removed exactly simultaneously.

It has been said that a large amount of fuel oil may have been stored in the building, but even if this was burning it could not have caused the simultaneous structural failure of all the support columns. The fact that WTC7 was built over a preexisting three story substation also does not explain the perfect symmetry of the collapse.

This failure was also attributed to "progressive total collapse" brought on by fire in FEMA's report.

WTC7 was not even mentioned in the 911 Commission Report.

What would it be like if every steel frame high-rise in existence was likely to collapse as a result of a not-too-serious fire? No one would set foot in them! As a matter of fact, no one would build them - they would be too dangerous. If the WTC buildings did collapse from fire, these unprecedented failures would be extremely significant and ought to have aroused the most profound forensic analysis (the painstaking reassembly of crashed aircraft comes to mind).

This did not happen. The steel from all three buildings was quickly removed - over the strenuousobjections of scientists, engineers, firefighters and families of victims - and has been melted down inoverseas markets. The blueprints for the Towers have also become unavailable.

Two groups who have been extremely vocal in protest of the destruction of evidence and lack of real forensic investigation have been the families of those killed and firefighters. Fire Engineering Magazine - the primary journal for firefighters everywhere - ran a scathing editorial in January 2002 in which they referred to the official investigation blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers as a "half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forceswhose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far a field of full disclosure."

This is obviously a big concern for firefighters because they have to go into burning buildings! Prior to9/11 there was no precedent to prevent or even caution them against entering the WTC Towers togo about their work of rescuing people and putting out the fires.

Surviving audio-tape of firefighter communications from the South Tower show that they had reachedthe 78th floor sky lobby and found only "two pockets of fire". They called for "two lines" and began to implement their evacuation plan just before the Tower "collapsed".




An analysis of the steel from the ruins of the tower shows that the steel had a high content of sulphur, which can happen when steel is misforged. The sulphur, in addition to burning on its own, also lowered the temperature at which the steel would soften and melt.

I would like to see this analysis. Who conducted the analysis? From what building was the steel taken from.

I must say this is the first I have heard of improperly forged steel.




As for Silverstein's comments, he was relating a conversation he had had with fire officials in determining whether or not to save the tower. He had said that they had "made the decision to pull it." The conspiracy theorists take that comment out of context, and point out that "pull" is used by building demoloshers to mean bringing down a building. Regardless of whether or not this is true, Silverstein is not a building demolosher, and he was speaking to firefighters, not building demolishers. When firefighters use the word "pull," they mean to pull out all of the firefighters and equipment and let the fire run its course. Silverstein's later comments clarify that this is exactly what he meant.

http://www.skepticwiki.org/wiki/index.php/9/11_coverup[/quote]

Since when does a building owner tell a fire department fighting a fire when they should "pull" out?

In the documentary "America Rebuilds", Silverstein makes the following statement;

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And we made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

In the same program a cleanup worker referred to the demolition of WTC 6: "... we're getting ready to pull the building six."

"Keep your eye on that building, it'll be coming down soon."

Molten steel was found “three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed [from WTCs 1 & 2],” Loizeaux said. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously in the late afternoon. ( http://www.americanfreepress.net/09_03_02/NEW_SEISMIC_/new_seismic_.html)

Wired New York reported "steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures".

Burning diesel can't produce enough heat to melt steel. How did it melt?

Consider the facts:

The fires in WTC 7 were not evenly distributed, so a perfect collapse was impossible.

Firemen anticipated the building's collapse (even though fire had never brought down a fire-protected steel building prior to 9/11).

Silverstein said of the building "the smartest thing to do is pull it."

WTC 7 subsequently collapsed perfectly into its footprint at freefall speed.

Molten steel and partially evaporated steel members were found in the debris.

No steel framed structure has EVER collapsed due to a fire, yet 3 buildings (and two different designs) did just that, all on the same day.

Look into the Madrid fire which burned for 18+ hours:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spain_fire_2005.html

One thing is for sure, the decision to 'pull' WTC 7 would have delighted many people:

The SEC has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed [in the collapse of WTC 7]. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom. ..."Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so much of their work is paper-intensive," said Max Berger of New York's Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann. "This is a disaster for these cases." http://www.nylawyer.com/login.php?source=/news/01/09/091701e


Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking [about WorldCom] was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center, one of the buildings that collapsed in the aftermath of the attack. The bank says that back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack. [TheStreet]http://www.thestreet.com/markets/matthewgoldstein/10036925.html

Inside [WTC 7 was] the US Secret Service's largest field office with more than 200 employees. ..."All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building," according to US Secret Service Special Agent David Curran. [TechTV]
http://www.g4tv.com/techtvvault/features/27904/Ground_Zero_for_the_Secret_Service.html

Yo HB you know too much :silly: :clap:

I think WTC7 collapsed just to give people with nothing better to do something to argue about.


Yes, it fell out of spite.

oh, ok...so YOUR sources are supposed to bve assumed credable while anything speaking against your side is supposed to be wrong. Whatever man.

How about this:

7 was not blown up. Why? Because logical thought dictates that IF they were going to blow it up they wouldn't have waited HOURS to do it. It would have fallen with the other buildings.

Are you capable of logical thought?

I'm out.

oh, ok...so YOUR sources are supposed to bve assumed credable while anything speaking against your side is supposed to be wrong. Whatever man.

How about this:

7 was not blown up. Why? Because logical thought dictates that IF they were going to blow it up they wouldn't have waited HOURS to do it. It would have fallen with the other buildings.

Are you capable of logical thought?

I'm out.

that isn't exactly logical though. more like an opinion. not even that but a guess.

oh, ok...so YOUR sources are supposed to bve assumed credable while anything speaking against your side is supposed to be wrong. Whatever man..

Well, I provided some kind of back up for my claims. Im still waiting for your response regarding the poor quality of the steel used in the construction of WTC 7.

How about this:

7 was not blown up. Why? Because logical thought dictates that IF they were going to blow it up they wouldn't have waited HOURS to do it. It would have fallen with the other buildings...

Now that’s what I was looking for.

Why do you feel it logical that the building should have been brought down right away? Logic would dictate that if you wanted the public to believe that the collapse was caused by fire, then logically fire would take time to melt steel and concrete....it would not happen right away.


Are you capable of logical thought?..

log·i·cal ( P ) Pronunciation Key (lj-kl)
adj.
Of, relating to, in accordance with, or of the nature of logic.
Based on earlier or otherwise known statements, events, or conditions; reasonable.
Reasoning or capable of reasoning in a clear and consistent manner.

I have already shown I am capable of logical thought. Are you capable of answering my question?

Yo HB you know too much :silly: :clap:

Maybe, but it is all quite worthless if those responsibile for the attacks continue to get away with this.

Sleep.
Eat.
Consume.
Dont question.
Watch tv.

Yes, it fell out of spite.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhh..........dont steal my thunder. :rofl:

7 was not blown up. Why? Because logical thought dictates that IF they were going to blow it up they wouldn't have waited HOURS to do it. It would have fallen with the other buildings..

To continue with your thought logic would also dictate that the first tower hit would come down first, since it was hit (more or less) in the center of the tower, causing much more damage to the core columns than the second plane to hit, since that one hit a corner and (as evident by the fireball on numerous DVD's) lost most of the fuel cargo before causing significant damage to its core.

But that is not the case.

This is pathetic. First of all there is no practical motivation for anyone to do this and the cover-up would be next to impossible when you consider how many people were crawling in, around and all over everything having anything to do with 9/11 both figuratively and literally.

And even if WTC 7 was blown up for some bizarre reason, who gives a crap? The truth surrounding every other aspect of this event is way more fascinating than some little side note about a building no one rememebers or cares about. What difference would it make if you were right about WTC7? What would that be? Some insurance fraud scheme? Ooooo spooky....

This is pathetic. First of all there is no practical motivation for anyone to do this and the cover-up would be next to impossible when you consider how many people were crawling in, around and all over everything having anything to do with 9/11 both figuratively and literally.....

You have not been paying attention have you.


And even if WTC 7 was blown up for some bizarre reason, who gives a crap?

Are you serious?


What difference would it make if you were right about WTC7? ....

Proves a coverup.


What would that be? Some insurance fraud scheme? Ooooo spooky....

To the tune of 4.6 billion dollars. That means higher premiums for all of us that have insurance.

But I think youre missing the big point....if 7 was pulled, it would have had to been wired weeks in advance.

I dont understand why people think that information gathered on the internet and from the news is soo flawless...

How about you guys go ahead and let me know when you have a security clearence that allows you to know the information you are debating. Then we will head to a secure area and you can appologize for being soo rediculous...

I dont understand why people think that information gathered on the internet and from the news is soo flawless......

I dont think that was ever said. I dont know why you think information on the net is so flawed. It would be quite easy to disprove if it was flawed, but so far I have yet to meet anyone (in real life and eLife) who can explain WTC 7.

ow about you guys go ahead and let me know when you have a security clearence that allows you to know the information you are debating. Then we will head to a secure area and you can appologize for being soo rediculous...
Why would you need a security clearence to understand how physics works? Or gravity for that matter?

I dont understand why people think that information gathered on the internet and from the news is soo flawless......

I dont think that was ever said. I dont know why you think information on the net is so flawed. It would be quite easy to disprove if it was flawed, but so far I have yet to meet anyone (in real life and eLife) who can explain WTC 7.

ow about you guys go ahead and let me know when you have a security clearence that allows you to know the information you are debating. Then we will head to a secure area and you can appologize for being soo rediculous...
Why would you need a security clearence to understand how physics works? Or gravity for that matter?

I think what HighlanderMac is saying is that since neither side in this debate has access to all the information, no one can argue that they are 100 percent right from a firm foundation.

I think what HighlanderMac is saying is that since neither side in this debate has access to all the information, no one can argue that they are 100 percent right from a firm foundation.

While true that very little in life is 100%, there are general rules that have become established through observation.
We know that energy is neither created nor destroyed. It merely changes forms. If we take the potential (chemical) energy in a barrel of oil and burn it, we get heat energy. When we take refined oil and burn it in our car's engine, we get kinetic (ie, motion) energy (plus some heat; an engine's not 100% efficient). When we use our car's brakes to bleed off some of that kinetic energy (ie, slow down), the energy is converted into heat (the brakes get HOT).
In the case of the free-falling body, the two kinds of energy we are concerned with are kinetic energy and potential energy. Examples of potential (gravitational) energy are the water stored way up high in a water tower, or a boulder perched atop a hill. If whatever's holding them up there is removed, they will come down, under the influence of gravity's pull.

It turns out that the equation for potential energy is as follows:
Potential Energy = Mass x Gravity x Height
It turns out that the equation for kinetic energy is as follows:
Kinetic Energy = 1/2 x Mass x Velocity(squared)
So let's just say, for the sake of simplicity, that our falling object has a mass of 1. (Remember, the object's mass will affect its energy, and its momentum, but not its rate of free-fall.)
The potential energy given up by falling 3 seconds (144 ft) is 1 x 32 x 144 = 4608
The kinetic energy gained after falling 3 secs is 1/2 x 1 x 96(squared) = 1/2 x 9216 = 4608
Seeing that energy was, in fact, conserved is how we know that the answer in The Simplest Case, above, was correct. We've checked our work, using an independent analysis, based upon the sound principle of conservation of energy. Now, and only now, we can be certain that our answer was correct.

Resistance from air
The free-fall equations reflect a perfect, frictionless world. They perfectly predict the behavior of falling bodies in a vacuum. In fact, some of you may have seen a science class demonstration in which the air is pumped out of a tube and then a feather will fall, in that vacuum, as fast as will a solid metal ball.
That's how parachutes work: much of the falling object's potential energy gets expended doing the work of pushing a lot of air out of the way in order for the object to fall. As a result, not all of the potential gravitational energy can go towards accelerating the object downward at at gravity's maximal rate of 32 ft/sec/sec.
In other words, only when there is zero resistance can any falling object's potenial energy be completely converted into kinetic energy. Anything which interferes with any falling object's downward acceleration will cause its acceleration to be reduced from the maximum gravitational acceleration of 32 feet per second per second, as some of gravity's potential energy is consumed doing work overcoming resistance.
That's why you may have heard the term "terminal velocity". The free-fall equations predict that a falling object's velocity will continue to increase, without limit. But in air, once a falling object reaches a certain speed, it's propensity to fall will be matched by air's resistance to the fall. At that point the object will continue to fall, but its speed will no longer increase over time.
Earth's gravity causes objects to fall. They fall according to precise, well-known equations. The equations assume no (air) resistance. Any resistance at all will cause the object to fall less rapidly than it would have without that resistance.
It is that last sentence which bears repeating.
There is a maximum possible rate at which objects fall, and if any of gravity's potential energy is used to do anything other than accelerate the object downward -- even just having to push air out of the way -- that object's downward acceleration will be diminished.
And if an object's downward acceleration is diminshed, it will be going slower along the way, and thus it will take longer to fall a given distance.


The towers were 1350 and 1360 feet tall. So let's start by using our trusty free-fall equation to see how long it should take an object to free-fall from the towers' former height.
Distance = 1/2 x Gravity x Time(squared)
or
Time(squared) = (2 x Distance) / Gravity
Time(squared) = 2710 / 32 = 84.7
Time = 9.2
So our equation tells us that it will take 9.2 seconds to free-fall to the ground from the towers' former height.
Using our simpler equation, V = GT, we can see that at 9.2 seconds, in order to reach the ground in 9.2 seconds, the free-falling object's velocity must be about 295 ft/sec, which is just over 200 mph.
But that can only occur in a vacuum.
Since the WTC was at sea level, in Earth's atmosphere, you might be able to imagine how much air resistance that represents. (Think about putting your arm out the window of a car moving half that fast!) Most free-falling objects would reach their terminal velocity long before they reached 200 mph. For example, the commonly-accepted terminal velocity of a free-falling human is around 120 mph. The terminal velocity of a free-falling cat is around 60 mph.
Therefore, air resistance alone will make it take longer than 10 seconds for gravity to pull an object to the ground from the towers' former height.

What in the world is your point with the above ramble??

What in the world is your point with the above ramble??

The point is the Towers were not brought down by fires or aircraft.

has anyone ever just considered that the towers had design flaws so they fell easier than they should?

Buildings collapse all the time from being improperly reinforced. I work in construction for the military. So I know not everything is built the way it should.

As a military member, I also no that NO, NONE, NADA, civilian knows all the information.

So yes it is debatable how the towers fall because no one knows the complete facts and the building of the towers.

I say there is no conspiracy and its all like what everyone saw on tv. But my opinion means nothing and this thread has gone on far to long of people who know little to nothing about what happened, other than reading someone else opinion about it.

Yes everyones research is real good in here and I respect that, but come on its impossible to prove this.

If it was provable by someone on SCIONLIFE, then I doubt they would be on scionlife.

Hey... where was David Copperfield that day???

Remember what he did with the Statue of Liberty?????

has anyone ever just considered that the towers had design flaws so they fell easier than they should?

Buildings collapse all the time from being improperly reinforced. I work in construction for the military. So I know not everything is built the way it should.

As a military member, I also no that NO, NONE, NADA, civilian knows all the information.

So yes it is debatable how the towers fall because no one knows the complete facts and the building of the towers.

I say there is no conspiracy and its all like what everyone saw on tv. But my opinion means nothing and this thread has gone on far to long of people who know little to nothing about what happened, other than reading someone else opinion about it.

Yes everyones research is real good in here and I respect that, but come on its impossible to prove this.

If it was provable by someone on SCIONLIFE, then I doubt they would be on scionlife.

Of course no design is perfect, but the collapse of those three towers is suspicious at best. If you really research the design of the towers, you will discover that they were actually overbuilt, as was most things back then (compare a car from the 50's to a modern one as an example).

A highly relevant expert was Frank A. DeMartini, Manager, WTC Construction and Project Management who said that the WTC towers were designed to take multiple hits from airliners and not collapse, comparing it to poking a pencil through fly netting, DeMartini was adament that the towers would not collapse. The WTC buildings could take a direct hit from a fully loaded 707, which was the largest jumbo jet at the time of construction. A 707 looks just as big, or bigger, than the planes which hit the WTC.

The three WTC buildings in question weren’t all designed the same way and weren’t all hit by airplanes, yet they all collapsed in the same fashion. The only thing they seemed to have in common were relatively small and manageable fires, as indicated by the work of firefighters right up to the moment of collapse. From the government’s report we know that only a small percentage of the supporting columns in each of the first two buildings were severed, and that the jet fuel burned off in just a few minutes.

To follow the latest “leading hypothesis”, what are the odds that all the fireproofing fell off in just the right places, even far from the point of impact? Without much test data, let’s say it’s one in a thousand. And what are the odds that the office furnishings converged to supply highly directed and (somehow) forced-oxygen fires at very precise points on the remaining columns? Is it another one in a thousand? What is the chance that those points would then all soften in unison, and give way perfectly, so that the highly dubious “progressive global collapse” theory could be born? I wouldn’t even care to guess. But finally, with well over a hundred fires in tall buildings through history, what are the chances that the first, second and third incidents of fire-induced collapse would all occur on the same day? Let’s say it’s one in a million. Considering just these few points we’re looking at a one in a trillion chance, using generous estimates and not really considering the third building (no plane, no jet fuel, different construction).

Solving the problem is a personal challenge, and involves at least three-steps. First, we have to admit we were wrong, and that we were fooled. This is not easy for most people, but congratulations to the neo-cons for noticing that their political opponents seem to be least able to admit they were wrong on any significant issue. Secondly, we have to see that terrorism is actually much worse than we feared because the terrorists are in charge. Such a pause on a national scale would be dramatic to say the least. If we get to the third step we begin to realize the scope of change necessary to move forward in a conscious manner.

If you make it through step one and care enough about people to work for step three, you may face ridicule and isolation. You may lose your income and some friends, but if we continue down the same path there’s a real chance you’re going to lose those anyway. On the upside you may be able to hold on to some sense of integrity. The only thing you can be certain of is that we’re all in this together. No matter how you voted, what credentials or positions you hold, or what faith you have in people, you will face the consequences of our collective self-deceptions. Now is the time for each of us to decide between a stormy reality and what’s behind the fantasy curtain.




WTC 1
Just before the general collapse of WTC1 something important happens. The great antenna, which was attached to the reinforced core of WTC1, begins to sink. Let me say it again. In the split second before the general collapse of the building, the antenna and thus the core gives out. The exterior floors could not and did not drag the thick core down perfectly onto the building’s footprint. I believe this is physically impossible, given the superb architecture of the buildings. And especially their super-redundant cores.

Addiotionally, the floors above the impact point actually lean to the left as the tower starts to collapse. It is at about a 35 degree angle from the core. Somehow, instead of following that path (and the path of least resistance) it then stops its sideways fall and begins to fall straight down, as if all the core columns below it crash site gave way at the same time. Look at the aftermath photos. There is about 6 stories of column left. How is that possible? If fire weakened the steel, how is it possible that the heat traveled down 80+ stories and caused pretty musch the entire core column to fail?

Man, how can you say that how fast the buildings fell could prove how they were brought down? A piece of concrete that is thrown off of a building is gonna have the same speed of freefall as a piece of concrete that is pushed, or shot, or tossed off of a building. I think you need to just let it go man.
You are not going to change the minds of those in here, especially when some of us have more information than other, that read reports when it occured.

Man, how can you say that how fast the buildings fell could prove how they were brought down? .

It cannot. It can say how they were NOT brought down though.

A piece of concrete that is thrown off of a building is gonna have the same speed of freefall as a piece of concrete that is pushed, or shot, or tossed off of a building. I think you need to just let it go man..

Because of the injustice to 3000+ innocent people, I cannot let it go. Those people, mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, friends (one victim happened to be a friend of mine) and family DESERVE to not have their lives taken from them in vain.

I dont think you really understand the equation I posted. In order for the towers to fall that fast, they would have had to NOT encounter any resistance. As is plainly evident through the dust clouds (powder clouds really) shown on DVD's, a lot of that energy was transfered to the concrete floors that made up the towers. This PROVES that the towers encountered resistance on the way to the ground. Therefore, there is no way the towers would have collapsed in the manner that they did.

You are not going to change the minds of those in here, especially when some of us have more information than other, that read reports when it occured.
Again, according to emails and PM's, I can get people to re-examine what they thought actually happened. That is all I am trying to accomplish. Eric would have wanted that, I assure you

do ya thang HB

You arent PROVING anything.. There are soo many factors in the world. I dont think you understand what I am saying.
There are people in this world that have more information than others.
And there are reasons that this information cannot be shared.
I understand that you are going to try and PROVE that 9-11 was a conspiracy. That your friends lives were taken in vain. But I assure you that this is not the case.
Not to mention. I would really like to know a few things.

As stated in the movie, one of the jets had a missile attached to the bottom of it. HAHAHAH, you really have to be joking me. So you are telling me that an airline would be willing to strap a missile on the bottom of their plane? Or are you saying that someone else put it on there without the airline knowing. Or maybe the airline was in cahoots and allowed whomever to strap a missile on the airplane and NO ONE would notice it. Not the people that load the bags up, not the people that direct the airplane to the harddock?
Oh and if you think the airline was in on it. WHY would they be? Do you have any idea how much money they lost after that?

I am just trying to see where you are coming from. You are giving all of these equations on how there is no way the building could have fallen that quickly. The world if full of impossibilities happening, not to mention, maybe you forgot something in your equation.

I am not saying you have, but there are sooooooo many outside possibilities that many people look for the worst case scenario and believe it. Why? Its simple. Because they do not want to believe that something like this could be caused by anyone except for someone they dispise.

Examples of this.. Whenever you want to believe that your significant other is cheating, you will make up some seriously insane stories to believe it. You know thats right..

As stated in the movie, one of the jets had a missile attached to the bottom of it...

THAT is disinformation and AT NO TIME did I say I believe that (I can assure you, I do NOT).

My research focus is on WTC 7 (mainly) and WTC 1 and 2 and HOW THEY FELL.

As far as I am concerned, everything else is a waste of time.

Phew.. lol, cause that really is some dumb a$$ thinking.

I will tell you right now that I have not researched WTC7 and honestly never will. I applaud you for your research and tenacity with the subject.
We all have different information, some more than others, some have done more research, but the truth of the matter is, you will never get me to believe 9-11 was a conspiracy, and I will never get you to believe that it wasnt.

I hope there are no hard feelings BTW. I dont think you are an idiot or anything, I hope you realize that...

I just hate reading this crap online. We need to remember 9-11 and never let it happen again.. whether it be a conspiracy or not. People need to learn from it, we need to come together as people and live good lives.

I am just trying to see where you are coming from. You are giving all of these equations on how there is no way the building could have fallen that quickly. The world if full of impossibilities happening, not to mention, maybe you forgot something in your equation....

As a scientist, I look for proof. When the government told me one thing, I decided to look into the events myself because it did not seem right to me...no military interception of stray aircraft, the black box recordings that were never released and then I found WTC 7. The smoking gun if you will.

Because they do not want to believe that something like this could be caused by anyone except for someone they dispise...

Why would that statement only apply to me? It seems like you will ONLY accept that terrorists were solely responsible. I, on the other hand, choose to examine evidence for myself and draw my own conclusions, free of the spin put on the story by the government


Examples of this.. Whenever you want to believe that your significant other is cheating, you will make up some seriously insane stories to believe it. You know thats right..

Huh? That is 100% false. If I think my GF is cheating, I will look for signs (evidence, if you will) that it is so. I am not so insecure that I would think she was cheating if there were no FACTS to support that. I would investigate (as I have done with 9/11) and come to a conclusion. If I found enough evidence she was cheating, I would confront her with that EVIDENCE, not the FEELINGS I have that I THINK she is cheating, but solid evidence.

Believe me, I started my journey into 9/11 simply looking for evidence to back up my gov'ts claims. I figured it would be easy to do. I didnt really think they had anything to do with it, and I was calling for carpet bombings of that damn desert. But the more I looked, the more questions were raised.

Please ignore that initial video link. If it talks of pods and no plane hitting the Pentagon, ignore it. Focus in on the ONE (three actually) event that we have NUMEROUS live footage of. From many different angles. This is the only real evidence out there.

What I meant about the GF thing, yes you will look for signs, but the majority of people will imagine things are worse than they actually are.

I didnt mean these to be directly pointing at you. I hope you see that, this is pointing to the average person.

I hope there are no hard feelings BTW. I dont think you are an idiot or anything, I hope you realize that....

I am 100% with you on that. I hope our disagreement does not spill into any other threads because that is not my intention.

We need to remember 9-11 and never let it happen again.. whether it be a conspiracy or not. People need to learn from it, we need to come together as people and live good lives.

See, that is my ENTIRE POINT of my investigations. How can we truly learn from 9/11 if our view of the events is entirely wrong?

If you would entertain me for a moment, what IF the govt was to blame? And we never leared that. How can we TRULY come together as a people (if you are speaking on a global scale) when we refuse (as the American public) to sit down and look at the FACTS with an open mind?

All I am saying is watch the videos (not the disinformation in the first post) commonly available at Blockbuster or NetFlicks. These are not "wacko" videos, but mainstream ones released from big name movie studios.

A review of an important one is here: http://www.media-criticism.com/Naudet_Brothers_09_2004.html

This DVD was nominated for BEST DOCUMENTARY in 2002. This is not a crack-pot point-of-view, but a LIVE, LIVING witness to the events of that day.

What I meant about the GF thing, yes you will look for signs, but the majority of people will imagine things are worse than they actually are.

I didnt mean these to be directly pointing at you. I hope you see that, this is pointing to the average person.

Thanks for the clarification.

If I may be so blunt (this is not aimed at any one person by the way), the majority of people are stupid. Just my opinion.

Hahahahaha.. ouch thats harsh, true, but harsh.. Usually I just think it, I dont let people know.

...Usually I just think it, I dont let people know.

:silly:

As you might have been able to tell, I have a big mouth and tend to ____ off a lot of people with some of the things I say.

blah.. oh well.. lifes a bizzatch then you die

Yeah, at least I have a fun car to drive until then.

there is a special on this on the Histroy Channel right now.

there is a special on this on the Histroy Channel right now.

Yeah, but that's the "mainstream media" so everything they say is a lie because they are in on the "coverup" :crazy:

had a lot to say about crazy conspiracy freaks, watched the video, going to make an appointment with a psychiatrist to see if i have any paranoid tendacies

there is a special on this on the Histroy Channel right now.

Yeah, but that's the "mainstream media" so everything they say is a lie because they are in on the "coverup" :crazy:

I forgot that if the facts dont support the theory then its because the facts are indeed just part of the coverup. I should have known the History channel was in on it.