Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
There is no such thing as physics or structural engineering, physical chemistry or thermodynamics. There's only a vague sense of what uninformed laymen express an equally ignorant opinion about. In the meantime I can dial up a You Tube video of an Airforce test, driving an MD F-4 Phantom II on a rocket sled into a concrete block at near supersonic speed and before your very eyes the plane actually evaporates into a cloud of dust leaving zero identifiable parts larger than the point of a ballpoint pen.
"There were iron micro-spheres found in the rubble. Nothing in those buildings or the planes could even approach the melting point of iron. Where did that extreme heat come from?"
The building became a kiln. Literally.
"The twin towers were designed to be hit by airplanes, in fact they were designed to withstand multiple impacts."
They were not, however, designed to stand indefinitely with a jetliner burning inside them. The chief architect for the project accurately predicted exactly how long they would stand while it was happening. They performed as designed, staying up as long as possible under the circumstances and then not falling over sideways.
People who agree with the "official" version of what happened that day can't understand how the "conspiracy" people can believe what they do based on the evidence and information they've seen, and the same thing applies the other way around. This article talks about how that divide came to be and is extremely unlikely to be bridged. But the comments are mostly saying, "My side of things is right, why can't the rest of you see that."
There are a lot of whacky folks out there, quite a few on the "conspiracy" side of the argument..
But given that any number of conspiracies in the past have finally come to light, sometimes after many decades (see Tonkin Gulf), those who do not automatically buy the official story actually have a more reality based view than those who do not.
The real whack jobs are those who believe what is essentially the unsupported words of proven liars, the believers in the official story.
one undoubtedly as good as your writing on Salon, but really, trotting out some whack job with a dubious theory does not mean there is not great reason to believe 911 was not an underhanded stunt.
In Germany, where people apparently STILL think, they made an excellent documentary, 9/11 False Flag, which removed all doubt in my head that the 911 stunt was not at least known about by the government if not helped along as well.
As the evil government forces carried out the attacks on 9/11 - buildings coming down, panic in the streets - right on schedule, George Bush spent 8 minutes in a classroom reading My Pet Goat and looking like a dumbass. Then, he brilliantly climbs into Air Force One, and flies randomly around the country while RUDY GIULIANI calms the nation...GENIUS!!
Some lesser conspiracy would have had the leaders looking sharp and heroic when it was all going down, but this one was so cleverly designed that the evil guys in charge actually cast themselves in the role of incompetents, just to throw us off!
A plane that's in the process of crashing into a building fires a missile at it? For good measure? Does your troofer friend explain how -- or why -- said missile would be mounted on the plane in advance? Please -- that's not an example of "bias" changing someone' interpretation of photographic evidence; that's an example of a loony making up an outlandish and implausible story to support an otherwise unsupportable mindset. Loonies like that have always existed, and they've always ignored all but the 0.0001% of reality that kinda-sorta-maybe supports their immovable opinions if you squint at it right. The only thing that modern information technology changes here is the sheer amount of raw data the loonies can sift through; and thus the amount of unconnected bits of data they can cobble together to support any wild story they want.
Mattwa writes:
They were not, however, designed to stand indefinitely with a jetliner burning inside them.
1) Yes they were. They were built to withstand raging carbon fires. 2) They didn't have burning jetliners inside them. Most of the fuel exploded out of the building on impact -- particularly with the second strike. You can see people standing in the holes made by the airplanes hoping to get rescued. The black smoke pouring out is a signal of very low temperature fire.
Jeffrey D -- it could be that Bush knew nothing about this. It could be that he did and could still barely believe it was happening. Who knows? But Bush acting like a fool is much less evidence to me than the fact that Building 7 was demolished -- and if al Qaida could get into our WTC buildings and plant explosives, why go to the trouble of hijacking planes?
Anyone who still buys wholesale the idea that the US government was completely innocent is a few dozen beers short of a six pack. That, or they are shills for someone.
Too many facts, conditions, conflicts of interest, money trails, even if you only count those reported in the corrupt major media, point to government complicity.
They did not even bother reporting who shorted the airline stocks because they knew where the trail ended.
The smoke from the fires was black indicating a low oxegen fire, the antithesis of a kiln. There are photographs (sorry Farhad I know that you have "debunked" photographs) showing a woman standing in the hole that the plane made in WTC 1. The impact on WTC 2 was at an oblique angle and the photos show a huge fireball blowing out the side, most of the fuel burned in that fireball. Firefighters who made it to the impact site described the fires as light and isolated that could be knocked out with 2 hoses.
Here is a picture of a woman waving from inside your "kiln". http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_woman.html
And the two firemen seemed not to have been affected by the "kiln" either.
Battalion Seven Chief (Palmer): "Battalion Seven ... Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones.
Ladder 15: "Chief, what stair you in?"
Battalion Seven Chief: "South stairway Adam, South Tower."
Ladder 15: "Floor 78?"
Battalion Seven Chief: "Ten-four, numerous civilians, we gonna need two engines up here."
Battalion Seven Chief: "Tower one. Battalion Seven to Ladder 15."
Battalion Seven Chief: "I'm going to need two of your firefighters Adam stairway to knock down two fires. We have a house line stretched we could use some water on it, knock it down, okay."
Ladder 15: "Alright ten-four, we're coming up the stairs. We're on 77 now in the B stair, I'll be right to you."
Battalion Seven Operations Tower One: "Battalion Seven Operations Tower One to Battalion Nine, need you on floor above 79. We have access stairs going up to 79, kay."
Battalion Nine: "Alright, I'm on my way up, Orlo."[52]
Here, Battalion Chief Palmer calls for more men and water to put out the isolated fires. His expression “10-45 Code Ones” refers to dead bodies, of which apparently there were many. The tape shows that the two firemen were not turned back by heat, smoke, or a wall of flames. They were able to function within the fire zone and were prepared to help the injured and combat the few isolated fires they found. Palmer even mentions that the stairway up to the next level, i.e., floor 79, was passable. Minutes later the building came down on their heads.
As for your theory that the planes "burning inside" somehow contributed to the collapse, well, you should know that no one, no one, says that buildings collapsed due to fire. The iron micro-spheres remain. Unexplained by the new "kiln" theory
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
