Everything you wanted to know about the 9/11 official conspiracy theory in 5 minutes.

What amounts to "plenty"? Then where was the plane debris in the media coverage?

 

Yes,there was


look for it,

 

Not quite. Think of a Newton's cradle.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Newtons_cradle_animation_book_2.gif

The energy of the collision moves through the balls in the cradle at the speed sound through the material (steel in this case). You can see as the ball springs off the opposite side that there's not a lot of energy lost during the transmission. There is some loss of course, but it's very minimal.

The structure of the building doesn't oppose the energy of the impact. It transmits it. When the top block hits the structure of the block below the energy transmits down the structure in a wave at the speed of sound through steel. Steel is very elastic, but even it has a limit to the amount of energy it can transmit. It can be overloaded, and this overloading creates an instability which leads to buckling. When a column has buckled is loses its entire capacity to transmit energy (load). When it is no longer able to transmit energy it is no longer able to hold itself up and it becomes part of the falling mass. In a collision like this energy is used and the collapse does slow because it takes energy to break the columns, but there's so much kinetic energy created in the 11 feet that the building falls between levels that the breaking energy is just a fraction of the total kinetic and potential energies of the upper portion.

Gravity is constant. It doesn't get minimized by the mass of an object. Any object will accelerate toward Earth at 9.8 meters per second no matter if it's a pea, or a battleship.

I'm aware that it's not a calculation, and that was kind of my point. The breaking of the floors does take energy but there's so much energy available that it doesn't take much of the total energy.

When torque is applied to an object floating in space, it is the point within the object that the object rotates around. In most cases this is the objects center of mass, but it is possible for an object to have a different center of mass then its center of inertia. I make the point about the rotation because it's important to realize that even though the tower looks like it's tipping, the center of inertia actually stays relatively in the same place before it begins to fall directly perpendicular to the ground. There's no force applied that actually pushes the center of inertia any other direction other then straight down.

This is a pretty good example, but let's talk about the math behind what's going on here. When you hold the ball in your hands you are supporting a static load. Static load is much different from live load. Dynamic load is so much different because the object is moving. Moving objects have kinetic energy, and the formula for this is one half the mass times the velocity squared. As you can guess, the velocity of an object has much more effect on its kinetic energy then its mass. This is why high speed collisions cause such tremendous damage. It's because there's such high energy levels involved. If you double an objects speed you quadruple its energy. Why does a tiny little bullet do such damage to a person? It's because it has such a high velocity.

In the case of the buildings, when the first impact happened, the structure below was required to transmit up orders of magnitude higher levels of energy then it was ever designed to transmit. Once that first impacted floor failed, the energy of the collapse only had potential to increase because the velocities kept increasing from floor to floor.

 

Awwww, poor homerjay is all butthurt over being exposed. Too bad. So sad.

Plenty. Let's see. There is the DNA evidence. The fact the black box was found. The fact you have numerous witnesses that saw the plane actually hit the building. The fact you have picture evidence of plane parts from a 757. The fact you have the radar evidence of Flight 77 from the time of takeoff to impact with the Pentagon. Is that enough for you? Oh wait. Truthers deny all evidence that doesn't fit their paranoid delusions.

And I'm talking about what was released later OFFICIALLY, not the leaked frames. I don't care if you're focusing solely on the leaked frames. It just shows you're not willing to look at all the evidence.

I've done the turn and flown into the Pentagon in a simulator numerous times. It was easy. Didn't even have to try. I've had pilot friends look at the data and the recreation of the FDR showing the control movements. They said it would be easy. In fact, just looking at the controls used, you know it wouldn't be that hard to replicate it. There is numerous records of Hanjour renting out and flying planes.

BTW, nice lie about the spiral coming out just above ground level. The spiral came out several miles and about 3000' in the air. The very least you can do is get the facts straight, right? I mean, if you're going to mock others about being an expert, you should know the material, right?

Really? Then why do you mock everyone else's expertise? Sounds rather hypocritical to me.

Well, that speaks volumes about your logic and reason then, doesn't it. WTC 7 wasn't hit by a plane, but a 110 story building fell next to it and started fires that burned for over seven hours uncontested. Funny how truthers think fire never damages or weakens structures.

You're right. As soon as someone comes up with a theory that fits the known facts better, we can examine that. So far truthers have only come up with stuff that DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE to fitting the facts. Yet that is what you preach; "the other theory". Good job!

Well, we all know what your opinion is worth. Why is it you ASSume explosions are caused by explosives? Can you tell the difference between detonation charges and a beam snapping in two under pressure? Really?

Read above about your opinion and explosives.

Well, again that is your opinion and a (*)(*)(*)(*) poor one at that. What evidence would you like supported better? See, unlike you truthers, I can back up my claims. Truthers turn tail and run because they know they have no evidence that actually backs up their claims.

Correct! First thing you've gotten right! A shame you're being facetious. So where are the commission members among the ranks of the TBM? Oh. None joined the truthers? What an amazing coincidence! Do you think that is because they know 9/11 was caused by Al Qaeda and not the paranoid delusions of truthers pretending their opinions is evidence? They had far more exposure to the sum total of evidence, yet not one of them doesn't believe the "official story" because THEY WROTE IT. The lies they found they reconciled with the evidence until they were satisfied. I realize that crushes your truther sensibilities, but tough up!

Again your worthless opinion. I addressed your specific complaints about 9/11. Your response was completely lacking in any kind of supporting evidence and basically amounted to a bunch of whining. The thing about truthers with "questions" is they don't WANT their questions answered. They would rather live happily with their paranoid delusions based on ignorance than face the truth.

You have yet to point out a real hole. Imaginary holes based on paranoid delusions aren't looking for the truth. That is RUNNING from the truth.

Really? So point out the lie. You've made the claim. Let's see you back it up.

Wrong yet again. I've directly pointed out the flaws in your "holes". It isn't my fault you're incapable of actually backing up your holes and instead have to try for petty insults. You want to go round and round? Fine. Post your best shot. I'll rip it to shreds and you'll be running in no time. It is easy to rip truther theories to shreds when you have the truth and evidence on your side and all truthers have is retarded opinions based on lies.

Simple enough for even Homer J Simpson to understand.

 

Im sorry, but eyewitness is THE WORST POSSIBLE TYPE OF EVIDENCE, for such reasons:

1. At the time of the collision, the credibility of the "eye witness" is completely questionable. Meaning:
a. Not having a clear view of the object
b. basing their claim on sound, not sight
c. basing their conclusion of what they saw from what others, or the news, had said prior to their admission (Coached or indiractly being coached)
d. basing their conclusion because it is the only plausible explanation of what they saw
e. the witness may be looking for media attention

All of these (and there are probably more) reasons have been proven reasons why eye witnesses are thought to be the least credible source of information in criminal investigations, criminal courts and trials. Despite being the worst source of information scientifically and factually speaking, it is the MOST WIDELY USED evidence in criminal investigations because: Jury members are most likely to believe eye witness evidence over other types of evidence.

A perfect example is the O.J. Simpson case. In such controversial cases, it is hard to have an impartial jury because, depending on how long it takes to start the trial, the possibility of finding a juror who had not heard a substantial amount of here say from the media is nearly impossible.

In other words, it would be extremely hard to find an "eye witness" who had not already heard it was a plane from the media, which greatly undermines the credibility of any eye witness.

Plus, you dont know if the eye witness evidence is selectively released. News channels will interview tons of people on a subject but only release certain ones. If the news says its a plane, how credible would they look after some eye witnesses saying something other than a plane.

The point is, 2.3 trillion dollars (yes enough to buy your own country) went missing from the state department, and was announced 1 day prior to 9/11. With no media coverage because 9/11 happened. 95% or more are still unaware of this fact.

What the average person does know is that 2.3 trillion dollars does not go missing, and is not untraceable when the IRS is able to track down 50,000 during an audit.

The average person does know that the government keeps data backups all over the country, not just at one place, not in just one section of one building. Sure, the investigation may have been taking place there, but thats electronic data being analyzed, which would have had to originate from another location.

But like the video said, it is either classified for public (government) safety, or been destroyed because it is not important.

We should just listen to the people who get a paycheck from the government who said there was debris, without any video or photographic evidence. Just like how they killed osama bin laden according to eyewitnesses and officials without providing any photos or video evidence. None of us are allowed to see, but movie directors are allowed special information to tell the story through the lens.

Its called propaganda bull(*)(*)(*)(*), take your heads out of your asses you 9/11 deniers.

 

I would also like to add that the time between said event and the admission of an eye witness testimony matters greatly. The more time that goes by, the less likely the information would be accurate. During times of crisis or extreme stress, people will often look away/hide or even black out. The amount of time that passes after a memory is recorded inhibits the mind's ability to accurately recall the event.

If you want to read more on eye witness testimony and why it sucks:

http://reason.com/archives/2009/04/08/eyewitness-testimony-on-trial

 

We know this. Even still, investigators don't just throw away eyewitness testimony. They look for commonality between statements and statements that match the evidence.

The key concept there is that they are still a credible source of information. Can they be wrong? Yes. But the more you have that all agree on certain points the more likely those points are to be correct.

Except many of the witness comments were made right after the impact. Not many of them said specifically what kind of plane it was and the few that did were pilots trained to identify aircraft. The description of the plane varied widely which is not indicative of the witness being swayed by reports from other people.

You should get your facts straight. Rumsfeld said 2.3 trillion dollars from the DEFENSE department (not State Department) was not fully TRACKED, not missing.

The transactions in question span decades. Considering the DOD budget at the time was less than 300 billion, one would have to "steal" the entire defense budget for eight years to make 2.3 trillion dollars go missing.

The transaction records in question were found to not be up to audit standards by the GOA. The data was not missing nor was it destroyed.

So you think the average government worker is going to cover up the largest crime in US history just because the government PAYS them a paycheck?!? WOW! I know truthers have low opinions of government workers, but (*)(*)(*)(*)! Funny how you people forget that government workers are just ordinary people not members of the Borg.

So far the only one proven to buy into propaganda bull(*)(*)(*)(*) is you. Maybe it is time for you to take your own advice and do a rectal cranial inversion.

 

As sound of a theory as that seems I still have a hard time believing that all the support from the steel frames were not enough to delay the collapse longer than 10 seconds.

 

I'm curious: what is your source for a 10 second collapse? None of the buildings in question collapsed in 10 seconds.

 

How many seconds was it then?
ha ha ha

Buildings normally crumble to dust.. it is a very common event.

Happens most weeks where I live...but then I do live in cloud cuckoo land.

 

It is insane that some Americans still believe the ridiculous conspiracy story about 19 muslims with boxcutters.

God.. you can sell Americans anything.

 

More than ten.

None of the buildings 'crumbled to dust'. They collapsed.

 

This response speaks volumes towards your intentions here. You aren't looking to engage in any kind of discussion. You are clearly here for the sole purpose of attacking and insulting anyone that questions the official version of events.

You haven't actually provided one bit of "evidence" to dispute my questions. You have merely rambled out knee jerk talking points combined with insults to diminish the argument and deflect from the validity of my questions.

You just aren't worth the time.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhGcBxONSvc&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhGcBxONSvc&feature=related[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeuN4cBFSXY&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL0CA3492E55945A99"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeuN4cBFSXY&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL0CA3492E55945A99[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRC4lCQuBmc&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRC4lCQuBmc&feature=related[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIC0Kl4TKoU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIC0Kl4TKoU[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Khm423m6DD0&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Khm423m6DD0&feature=related[/ame]

 

The hijackers were armed with more than just box cutters.

 

Do you have a number for me? Was it 11 or 12?

Actually the buildings exploded into dust. I have never seen anything like it outside of cloud cuckoo land.

 

Oh.. I have not heard this one.

What else did they have? Moustache clippers? Toothpicks?

And how do you know that they had boxcutters in the first place? Did they find them in the dust?

 

You're right. You're not worth anyone's time. Just another truther spam bot who can't think for himself. The evidence is the fact you couldn't even respond. Welcome to the wonderful world of being exposed for what you are.

 

Is there any reason why you believe the official fairy story?

Do you just blindly believe what you are fed?

You do realise that there is no evidence to back the official fairy story? I wonder why you do not demand ANY evidence from your masters .. and yet you require 100% evidence from so called truthers.

It is certainly a very strange psychosis.

 

Between 16 and 18, if I recall correctly.

Actually, they didn't explode. They collapsed.

 

Oh look! A truther troll bot! Anyone ever notice the sock puppets come on here with only a couple posts under their belt and most of them in the conspiracy theory section?

As for your blatant lies, they're not worth responding to with one exception. Truthers don't provide ANY evidence. They provide opinion and pretend that is good enough.

And you're right. Truthers have a very VERY strange psychosis.

 

They were armed with knives and box cutters. Several were reported to have what looked like explosives attached to themselves.

These reports came from people on board the hijacked planes, calling from air phones.

 

Can you offer me evidence from the official fairy story.

Tell me all about the 19 hijackers.

Tell me why there have been no trials of anyone related to 911. Apparently it would have required hundreds of people to carry out such an operation.

You are insane if you cannot see that powers in the US wanted a new pearl harbour.

911 benefited them much more than it did any muslim extremists.

Why would muslim extremists angry at the US presence in the middle east.. give the US a free licence to bomb, occupy and invade?

Just think about the motives and who gained from 911.

ps. I am not a truther. I am not from the US. We do not label people with simplistic black and white names as you do in the US. Libs and all that silly stuff.

You get me?

 

Oh is that right?

Thanks ... I did not realise.

You learn something new every day.

Those air phones are great.

 

After that, I'll make your dinner, tie your shoes, and fold your laundry. Because heaven forbid you have to do anything for yourself.

 

Hello.. I do not understand.
I have looked for evidence in the official fairy story.
I did not find any.

Thanks for the kind offers though.

You do realise .. there must be a reason why 60% of Brits believe that the US was involved in 911? 70% of Germans. Even 35% of your backward nation's population doubt the official story.. This is because there just is no evidence to back up the 19 muslim dwarfs and the beardy giant bogeyman conspiracy theory.