Jump to content
Identity

9/11 Documentary

 Share

128 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Well if you are an engineer please answer the question that has yet to be answered. How did the towers come to the ground in almost freefall speed? If you as an engineer subscribe to the pancake theory then please explain why the floors provided no resistance. If you can come up with an answer to this then we can start getting into building 7 etc.

Basic physics:

Acceleration = force / mass..

The structure was a steel building, therefore as soon as one area of the building was weekend the other was unable to support it causing a rapid collapse. Lets not forget the height of the buiding and the fact the the fireball would have travelled thoughout the lift shafts, further weakening the structure..

According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Basic physics:

Acceleration = force / mass..

The structure was a steel building, therefore as soon as one area of the building was weekend the other was unable to support it causing a rapid collapse. Lets not forget the height of the buiding and the fact the the fireball would have travelled thoughout the lift shafts, further weakening the structure..

Well this theory of yours sadly ignores the design of the building and fails to account for the rapid collapse after very little burning time. The official explanation is that fire weakened the steel causing a collapse but the fire was clearly not a raging inferno and the majority of the jet fuel clearly exploded outside the building. Add to this the fact that people can be seen at the hole left by the plane shortly afterwards. This again demonstrates that the fire from the initial impact was not as bad as is claimed.

Plus in 1975 the north tower of the WTC burned for 4 hours and the tower did not collapse. The plane did not cause collpase directly, the official story is that fire brought down the towers. The central core was very strong and had little to fuel a fireball. Other steel structures have burned for much longer and have not collapsed.

Even if the weight of the above floors was too much for the below floors then the below floors would still provide resistance. This would slow down the collapse. The plane that hit the south tower(which came down first) did not hit the centre of the building but the side so it didn`t come close to the central steel core.

wtc_9_63.jpg

So what exactly caused the fireball to travel away from the impact zone and down the sealed elevator shafts?

God, this is still alive?

"The claims that the explosions and fires would not have generated enough heat to cause the building to collapse are nonsense," Partin told THE NEW AMERICAN. "Steel doesn't have to 'melt' as some of these people claim. The yield strength of steel drops very dramatically under heat, and the impact of the airliners would have severely impacted the support columns. When they could no longer support the upper stories and the top started coming down, the dynamic loading caused a very rapid collapse, or 'pancaking,' that would have very nearly approached free-fall rate. No demolition charges were needed to accomplish this."

I know you've invested a lot in believing there's a conspiracy, but you'd do yourself a big favor if you'd just give it up and move on. There was no conspiracy by anyone but Al Qaeda to attack the US.

If you have no interest in this topic why respond to it so much? You help keep it alive after all. I invest myself into studying things rather than just blindly believing what i am told. I have a brain so i use that brain. You are entitled to your views of both the WTC and of myself but until many questions are answered there can be no real official explanation of 9/11.

23rd February 2005 Married.

10th May 2005 I130 packet sent to TEXAS forwarded to Cali.

12th May 2005 NOA1 Received date.

14th May 2005 delivered at 4:34 am LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA 92607.

23rd May 2005 NOA1 notice date.

27th May 2005 NOA1 hits the mailbox.

13th August 2005 po po form mailed off with £10 cheque.

2nd September 2005 po po letter arrives.

3rd September a 4 week visit to GA assuming i get allowed in.

30th september 130 days on I130 and counting.

(Hopefully i finally get a wedding ring today too)

30th November NOA2 date. woohoo

January 2006 case arrives at NVC finally(not sure about exact date)

17th February 2006 IV bill mailed back

21st April case complete (sorry i have missed some dates of forms going back and forth)

2nd May case forwarded to Embassy in London

10th July 2006 visa interview 10.30 a.m.

clyde80b.gifmeandnikki.gif

http://www.corona-baster.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Morocco
Timeline
If you have no interest in this topic why respond to it so much? You help keep it alive after all. I invest myself into studying things rather than just blindly believing what i am told. I have a brain so i use that brain. You are entitled to your views of both the WTC and of myself but until many questions are answered there can be no real official explanation of 9/11.

On the contrary, I have a brain, it's fairly well educated, and it's served me pretty well as a rocket scientist. I do not blindly follow what I'm told; I believe in the process known as "science" in which anything can be falsified. What you cannot seem to accept is that the official consensus has not been falsified. The "questions" you have are either misunderstandings on your part or minor details. They do not call into question the entire official consensus.

Me -.us Her -.ma

------------------------

I-129F NOA1: 8 Dec 2003

Interview Date: 13 July 2004 Approved!

US Arrival: 04 Oct 2004 We're here!

Wedding: 15 November 2004, Maui

AOS & EAD Sent: 23 Dec 2004

AOS approved!: 12 July 2005

Residency card received!: 4 Aug 2005

I-751 NOA1 dated 02 May 2007

I-751 biometrics appt. 29 May 2007

10 year green card received! 11 June 2007

Our son Michael is born!: 18 Aug 2007

Apply for US Citizenship: 14 July 2008

N-400 NOA1: 15 July 2008

Check cashed: 17 July 2008

Our son Michael is one year old!: 18 Aug 2008

N-400 biometrics: 19 Aug 2008

N-400 interview: 18 Nov 2008 Passed!

Our daughter Emmy is born!: 23 Dec 2008

Oath ceremony: 29 Jan 2009 Complete! Woo-hoo no more USCIS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this theory of yours sadly ignores the design of the building and fails to account for the rapid collapse after very little burning time. The official explanation is that fire weakened the steel causing a collapse but the fire was clearly not a raging inferno and the majority of the jet fuel clearly exploded outside the building. Add to this the fact that people can be seen at the hole left by the plane shortly afterwards. This again demonstrates that the fire from the initial impact was not as bad as is claimed.

Plus in 1975 the north tower of the WTC burned for 4 hours and the tower did not collapse. The plane did not cause collpase directly, the official story is that fire brought down the towers. The central core was very strong and had little to fuel a fireball. Other steel structures have burned for much longer and have not collapsed.

Even if the weight of the above floors was too much for the below floors then the below floors would still provide resistance. This would slow down the collapse. The plane that hit the south tower(which came down first) did not hit the centre of the building but the side so it didn`t come close to the central steel core.

wtc_9_63.jpg

So what exactly caused the fireball to travel away from the impact zone and down the sealed elevator shafts?

Actually my theory is what takes the design into consideration. Based on the picture you provided, the strongest part of the building is based around the center of it. If the building had been built out of reinforced concrete I would agree that it would not have fallen let alone in such a time frame. On top of that, anyone who has dealt with kerosine (jet fuel) knows that this type of fuel tends to spread as it burns, unlike automobile fuel which will simply evaporates. The fuel would have had time to leak down the center of the building.

62589191-S.jpg

Anyway, the fuel alone did not take down the towers. The main culprit was the collapse of the main stuctural frame due to the weakening of the center frame, which was caused by the impact of the plane. The burning fuel simply further weakened the frame which caused it to completely give way..

PS Steel does not need to melt to be weakened

Edited by Infidel

According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn`t claim that steel needed to melt to weaken but the plane did not hit the central core and therefore your argument seems lacking.

and what about Building 7? No plane even hit building 7 yet that came down perfectly straight.

23rd February 2005 Married.

10th May 2005 I130 packet sent to TEXAS forwarded to Cali.

12th May 2005 NOA1 Received date.

14th May 2005 delivered at 4:34 am LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA 92607.

23rd May 2005 NOA1 notice date.

27th May 2005 NOA1 hits the mailbox.

13th August 2005 po po form mailed off with £10 cheque.

2nd September 2005 po po letter arrives.

3rd September a 4 week visit to GA assuming i get allowed in.

30th september 130 days on I130 and counting.

(Hopefully i finally get a wedding ring today too)

30th November NOA2 date. woohoo

January 2006 case arrives at NVC finally(not sure about exact date)

17th February 2006 IV bill mailed back

21st April case complete (sorry i have missed some dates of forms going back and forth)

2nd May case forwarded to Embassy in London

10th July 2006 visa interview 10.30 a.m.

clyde80b.gifmeandnikki.gif

http://www.corona-baster.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary, I have a brain, it's fairly well educated, and it's served me pretty well as a rocket scientist. I do not blindly follow what I'm told; I believe in the process known as "science" in which anything can be falsified. What you cannot seem to accept is that the official consensus has not been falsified. The "questions" you have are either misunderstandings on your part or minor details. They do not call into question the entire official consensus.

I never said you didn`t have a brain. My statements were about me and not about you. I was simply telling you that i am not some sheep and i have looked into the events of 9/11.

I don`t think my questions are minor details. I think the events of 9/11 are more gaping holes than minor scratches.

Plenty of the so called facts do not add up. Saying i know stuff because my job is this does not sadly answer those questions. Even if you assume the official story is accurate it still leaves the government of USA and goverenments around the western world giving themselves more power and taking away people`s liberties. Starting wars of aggression against civillians and the like. This is another fact that indicates to me that this was not the work of cave dwellers.

23rd February 2005 Married.

10th May 2005 I130 packet sent to TEXAS forwarded to Cali.

12th May 2005 NOA1 Received date.

14th May 2005 delivered at 4:34 am LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA 92607.

23rd May 2005 NOA1 notice date.

27th May 2005 NOA1 hits the mailbox.

13th August 2005 po po form mailed off with £10 cheque.

2nd September 2005 po po letter arrives.

3rd September a 4 week visit to GA assuming i get allowed in.

30th september 130 days on I130 and counting.

(Hopefully i finally get a wedding ring today too)

30th November NOA2 date. woohoo

January 2006 case arrives at NVC finally(not sure about exact date)

17th February 2006 IV bill mailed back

21st April case complete (sorry i have missed some dates of forms going back and forth)

2nd May case forwarded to Embassy in London

10th July 2006 visa interview 10.30 a.m.

clyde80b.gifmeandnikki.gif

http://www.corona-baster.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn`t claim that steel needed to melt to weaken but the plane did not hit the central core and therefore your argument seems lacking.

and what about Building 7? No plane even hit building 7 yet that came down perfectly straight.

How do you know it didn't hit the central core?? Logic indicates that a plane travelling at that speed would easily have hit the central core. I remember seeing a doc which explained how the WTC had a design flaw were the center of the building carried all of the stuctual strength and was not designed to protect against fires or such an impact..

According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn`t claim that steel needed to melt to weaken but the plane did not hit the central core and therefore your argument seems lacking.

and what about Building 7? No plane even hit building 7 yet that came down perfectly straight.

How do you know it didn't hit the central core?? Logic indicates that a plane travelling at that speed would easily have hit the central core. I remember seeing a doc which explained how the WTC had a design flaw were the center of the building carried all of the stuctual strength and was not designed to protect against fires or such an impact..

Well firstly your explanation is actually different to the official story but just watch the direction of the south tower hit. The plane clearly does not hit centre and clearly was in the wrong direction to hit central columns. Added to the fact that people have already stated quite clearly that they believe the plane would just break up on impact. The alluminium can theory does not support the steel building destruction theory sadly. Naturally there are official story documentaries to support the official story and to keep people questioning. I saw a documentary which claimed the designers of the building had not factored in the fuel of the aircraft. This is not however the case as the WTC was designed to withstand a fully loaded 707. The designers bleieved it could withstand multiple 707 hits aswell. The design of the building was to sway when hit by adverse weather or aircraft. This did indeed happen. Then the building stopped swaying as it had absorbed the impact. If the plane had knocked out the core then thebuilding would have started to fallstraight away i would imagine.

23rd February 2005 Married.

10th May 2005 I130 packet sent to TEXAS forwarded to Cali.

12th May 2005 NOA1 Received date.

14th May 2005 delivered at 4:34 am LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA 92607.

23rd May 2005 NOA1 notice date.

27th May 2005 NOA1 hits the mailbox.

13th August 2005 po po form mailed off with £10 cheque.

2nd September 2005 po po letter arrives.

3rd September a 4 week visit to GA assuming i get allowed in.

30th september 130 days on I130 and counting.

(Hopefully i finally get a wedding ring today too)

30th November NOA2 date. woohoo

January 2006 case arrives at NVC finally(not sure about exact date)

17th February 2006 IV bill mailed back

21st April case complete (sorry i have missed some dates of forms going back and forth)

2nd May case forwarded to Embassy in London

10th July 2006 visa interview 10.30 a.m.

clyde80b.gifmeandnikki.gif

http://www.corona-baster.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...