The Science of 9/11 - Let's Mix it Up!
 

Apologists for the government's hypothesis (it's not even a theory) of what happened on 9/11 might want to watch this when it comes out:



:D

no it was done by gadafiiiiiiiii

There has already been a scientific study with actual demonstrations conducted and the well know "truthers" would not accept what they saw with their own eyes. One of the things demonstrated was..."thermite" would not have cut the beams and another was...a missile did not hit the pentagon. I have seen the documentary of the demonstrations and listened to the weak comebacks of the "truthers".

This again

Jebus here we go again.

First of all the idea that a "missile" hit the Pentagon is not any part of general or real 9/11 Truth since it has no factual backing. It has as much relevance as UFO theories. Nobody believes it.

The "demonstrations" that showed thermite was ineffectual were bogus, and I could show you others that demonstrate the opposite, more effectively and economically.

There has been no actual scientific demonstration of the government hypothesis that held any water.

Yep! Yep!

:D

not thermite..."termites"!

i think demo teams are spending way too much time and money bringing down buildings when all they have to do is a little external damage and a few small fires.

i'd like to see some footage of the pentagon attack rather than a few frames not showing anything and then a fireball. surely there was at least one other camera angle.

Termites wouldn't infest a steel and concrete building, idiots.

.

Imagine, a few gallons of gas that cost a fraction of what actual explosives do.... lol

So would I. WOuld go a long way to "proving" the government hypothesis.

YEP!!! because people who hate the government and distrust Obama still follow the government ideas on this... weird, ain't it?

:D

What about steel eating alien termites?
http://eideard.files.wordpress.com/2...pg?w=316&h=240

Yep! Yep! the well known "truthers" denied what they witnessed with their own eyes as shown by actual demonstrations. I have also seen the documentary of computer models that explained the why and how...but of course the "truthers" find fault with those also. Yep! Yep!

In the case of the "thermite" demo...commercial thermite was used and it would not cut the beams...but one or more of the "truthers" said well the military has thermite that would cut the beams. How would they know that since I am not aware of a demonstration that the military has conducted showing that their thermite would cut the beams. The "truthers" simply are not going to accept any truth other than what they think is the truth...for whatever their reason/reasons.

Let's talk science: When a large airplane full of jet fuel hits a building one thousand feet up in the air and sets fire to it for hours, eventually the building falls down.

I saw it with my own eyes.

But your eyes must have deceived you. The "truthers" watched the actual demonstrations and did not believe what their eyes saw.

Is this the full movie?

Oh lord the stupid never stops around here. :1orglaugh

Obama says he is aware "that there are still some who would question" 9/11. He says that Al Qaeda "claimed credit for the attack" and "even now state their determination to kill on a massive scale". "they (Al Qaeda) are trying to expand their reach"

Whereas, now that NATO have helped the Al Qaeda Libyan Rebels to take control of Libya, Obama welcomed them at the UN. ?Libya is a lesson in what the international community can achieve when we stand together as one,? said Obama after formally meeting the Libyan Al Qaeda Rebels leader Mustafa Abdel-Jalil at the UN.

Even for the Trusters; something won't be adding up :upsidedow

It wasn't denied. The demo was faulty.

Computer recreations by NIST where they denied requests for the data used are not valid.

The thermite demo you're referring to did not use the thermite properly, first of all, and secondly what was found in the dust was unreacted nano-thermite.

What you think you saw is not the same as what happened. And science concluded that one or two airplanes hitting those buildings would not have brought them down the way they came down.

:D

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Oh great, back to changing more minds on the subject.

Awesome.

A few more threads and there should be a unified view of what happened exactly.

Perfect.

there is an inherent problem trying to solve an illogical event with logical thinking.

What i find surprising is the unanswered questions that are easy to answer... like

Let's see the numerous footage of the pentagon crash that exist and why haven't we seen them yet.

911 was an Israeli operation,

Nothing but Jews with a few well serving gentiles.
The love that we keep fighting about stupid thermites and such so noone is pointing the finger.

Lets not forget the 5 Israeli's arrested on 911 and mysteriously sent back to Israel. :)

why would someone blow up the buildings

For teh lulz?

In my opinion, 9/11 was not only propaganda, but a slight of hand diversion. Because it had everyone look in one direction, (The Tragedy) While the dark side so-called government was really plotting and making major moves, right under our noses.

Proof that explosives can NOT destroy concrete.
Get real man no way that any concrete building can be destroyed by explosives.

What I think I saw is exactly what everyone saw - huge airplanes crashing into buildings that fell down.

I've read dozens of books - from both sides - about 9/11 and nothing has convinced me other wise. Why would anyone want to stage an attack like this - so we can invade Afghanistan? LOL.

Actually, someone (maybe scientists) said that 2 planes would not have brought the towers down the way they did. That does not mean that they are right.

Damage to the buildings + high heat + long period of time + weakening of the steal + heavy weight = collapse. You don't need to be a scientist to see this but real scientists have already shown how it can happen.

Nothing like a 911 Truther thread to pull mayabong off of Stormfront and back to GFY for a few posts. :)

There are lots of people on both sides that have big degrees. I don't think it matters what kind of degree you have. I think we are all predisposed to believe what we believe in no matter what the evidence is. In other words, if your your the type of person who believes that this is a false flag operation you will twist the evidence to believe what you believe in. If you don't believe it was a false flag operation, you will see the evidence to support this way of thinking.

I look at it this way... This was a huge event that took place in multiple states, involving tens of thousands of people. Some of these people might be sane, but some of them might have a lower IQ than my pet dog. And everything sees things in a different light. We have multiple people who saw the so called plane hit the Pentagon - but some say it was definitely a large airplane, and others say it was definitely a missile.

This was video taped from every angle, yet we understand so little of what happened inside of those buildings. It's very easy to see something odd and then raise a question of doubt. It's a lot easier to raise doubt than it is to answer a question.

le sigh...lol

This explains the whole thing.

wow...is that the average person from mid america/canada?

sadly i think it is

wow :helpme

you know that is a truther video trying to be a parody of the "official story" right?

Yes darling.

The data doesnt even matter. Read about the project for a we American century with docs signed by the vulcans in bushs war cabinet and it's pretty obvious why this was allowed to happen.

What I Iove most is everyone sucking bush off because another terrorist attack didn't happen after 9/11. Hello drones! 9/11 happened and bushs watch.

And for the simple minded who are gonna scream "liberal" - Obama sucks too.

:thumbsup

A compilation of demolitions conducted using the French demolition technique of vérinage. This is achieved with hydraulics that push structural members out of alignment, allowing the top portion of a building to then demolish the structure below via gravity alone, without the use of explosives. Note that the collapses are rapid and produce copious dust.

all demolitions collapse rapid and produce 'copious' dust... Does this mean every demolition is a government conspiracy? Just because it looks similar to a controlled demolition does not mean it is one.


The only things the government tried to cover up that day is their incompetence to respond to such threats. Which makes perfect sense politically and as a measure to keep the public from thinking their government protection was impotent and ineffective which would have made morale and fear far worse if they came out and said it.

If you think these things through the answers are right there. Stop watching x-files it has made you dumb...

you believe these things because of the proof given to you on CNN etc?
the government is trying to cover up their mistakes..it was said on CNN?

That wasn't the intended context of my post, I was encouraging debate on the physics of the collapses; by looking at vérinage it can help people to form their own conclusions on how the towers fell :2 cents: