WTC Was Demolished By Explosives!

Post by **Freakaloin** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 3:55 am

these guys know more then any of u fucks...
http://www.physics911.net/

Post by **Freakaloin** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 3:59 am

crushing...compelling...obvious...
http://physics911.ca/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3

Post by **Nightshade** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:03 am

Goof, do you ever get tired of being a dumbass?

Post by **Dave** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:06 am

http://dept.kent.edu/sels/faculty.asp
Walter E. Davis, Associate Professor, Sport Studies
Education: B.A. (Physical Education), Graceland College; M.A. & Ph.D. (Special Education), University of Connecticut
Research Interests: Pedagogy; Motor Development/Control in Disabilities; General Systems Theory applied to Biological and Social Systems.
E-Mail: wdavis@kent.edu

he's a fucking gym teacher

Post by **Dave** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:11 am

Ah.. Geoff edited his post. The other article was written by a gym teacher at Kent State

Post by **Duhard** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:14 am

Well it's safe to say geoff got destroyed in this thread :icon14:

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:18 am

Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition And 'Inside Job'
Highly recognized former chief economist in Labor Department now doubts official 9/11 story, claiming suspicious facts and evidence cover-up indicate government foul play and possible criminal implications.
June 12, 2005

http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/ar ... /27302.htm

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:19 am

again, I haven't read these articles, and claim massive ignorance on the entire issue.

I'm just irresponsibly pasting articles whose headlines I thought might make them useful in this thread.

:icon31:

Post by **Freakaloin** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:53 am

Duhard wrote:Well it's safe to say geoff got destroyed in this thread :icon14:

don't be as dumb as them fag0t...

Post by **Duhard** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:56 am

Freakaloin wrote:don't be as dumb as them fag0t...

edit-ROFL for the love of god plz somebody photoshop a pic of geoff's head into that pic.

Post by **RiffRaff** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 5:16 am

Freakaloin wrote:jesus u guys r retarded...a big fireball is nothing but show...he and other explosives have massive energy...a shock wave which travels way out...that flimpsy plane was mostly intact...the ground did all the damage...a bomb would have blown that to bits...

But what if it was a teeny-tiny, shaped charge placed in the wing above the engine. That would allow the explosive force to be directed in the direction that NASA wanted it to go so they could prove their point in the test. I'm sure, as you'll agree because NASA is a government agency, that they conspired to falsify this test to their benefit.

Post by **RiffRaff** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 5:18 am

Dave wrote:http://dept.kent.edu/sels/faculty.asp
Walter E. Davis, Associate Professor, Sport Studies
Education: B.A. (Physical Education), Graceland College; M.A. & Ph.D. (Special Education), University of Connecticut
Research Interests: Pedagogy; Motor Development/Control in Disabilities; General Systems Theory applied to Biological and Social Systems.
E-Mail: wdavis@kent.edu

he's a fucking gym teacher

gym teacher... Nice sources.... :lol: :lol: :lol:

Post by **Freakaloin** » Sat Jun 18, 2005 5:53 am

RiffRaff wrote:
Freakaloin wrote:jesus u guys r retarded...a big fireball is nothing but show...he and other explosives have massive energy...a shock wave which travels way out...that flimpsy plane was mostly intact...the ground did all the damage...a bomb would have blown that to bits...
But what if it was a teeny-tiny, shaped charge placed in the wing above the engine. That would allow the explosive force to be directed in the direction that NASA wanted it to go so they could prove their point in the test. I'm sure, as you'll agree because NASA is a government agency, that they conspired to falsify this test to their benefit.

jesus ur just an idiot...

Post by **R00k** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:15 am

I'm not sure who said it does, but jet fuel does not explode. Not unless it is under pressure. It's just like gasoline or kerosene -- extremely flammable. Sure, when you have tons of it ignited in open air at once, it looks like an explosion, but it is not an explosion.

It's just a giant molotov cocktail.

Post by **R00k** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:22 am

Nightshade wrote:I really don't want to sound like I'm dismissing eyewitness accounts, but are these people qualified to say what a bomb detonating sounds like? Can they verify that it was a bomb? Can they tell the difference between a series of explosions and a succesion of 3000 ton floor slabs collapsing? Just because they use words like 'detonated' doesn't mean that that's what happened.

Well, I have to give at least some credence to the 20-year firefighter and the fire chief. And a thud is usually something with a shockwave. Faraway cannons thud, but faraway falling buildings are just deep, low growls.

A floor falling at an angle the way the top floors did wouldn't make a single sudden sound at all; especially with everything that was crashing down with them.

Post by **R00k** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:23 am

Geoff you're an idiot, and I doubt anybody will take anything you say about this subject seriously.

Post by **R00k** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:23 am

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

no explosives needed

That's just a fire, and it burned out in a few minutes.

Post by **R00k** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:26 am

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:geoff do you know what sort of heat and force are created in a small explosion (say 1 gallon of deisel with 1 gallon of unleaded petrol and some gun powder?

If a large pool of diesel fuel is spilled in open air and lit with a spark, it won't create an explosion. Haven't you dumped diesel fuel on a fire before?

The ingredients you mentioned won't create an explosion, unless they are in a pressurized container when they are ignited.

Post by **Dave** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:32 am

OK, then why does this plane blow to kingdom come when it slams into the ground?

http://www.linienmc.dk/video/crash-plan ... %20707.mpg

Please note were the explosion begins: The wings.
Where is the fuel stored? The wings.

Post by **inphlict** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:40 am

It’s too big to be a cover up, you would need so many people to be able to pull something like this. There is also no real evidence just speculation.

The only consipracy theory that I think could have some truth is the jfk assasination but I’m not 100% sure.

Post by **HM-PuFFNSTuFF** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 12:42 am

R00k wrote:
HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:geoff do you know what sort of heat and force are created in a small explosion (say 1 gallon of deisel with 1 gallon of unleaded petrol and some gun powder?

The ingredients you mentioned won't create an explosion, unless they are in a pressurized container when they are ignited.

incorrect my friend. i have actually created such explosions for a hollywood movie

the ingredients above in a mortar with a charge and kafuckingboom
edit: the gas and deisel in garbage bags

30 foot cloud of flame

Post by **Nightshade** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 2:04 am

I think that it's really important to define what an explosion really is. Just extremely rapid burning. The reason why det cord "explodes" is because it burns at a rate of 22,000 feet per second.
The reason why you could get an "explosion" from a garbage bag full of fuel is that there would be a lot of fuel vapor present, which burns VERY fast.

Post by **Freakaloin** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 2:54 am

with little force...bunch of morons round here...

Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:29 am

Little force?

I watched first hand a couple of dope heads light a bon-fire by pouring a gallon of gas on the wood and didn't bother to step back when they where ready to put a match to it. They got knocked back onto their asses and I was hit in the chest with a nice concusion from the blast at close to 20 feet away. What was weird was it felt like I was sucked back towards the blast in the same instant.

Lucky for the 2 guys they didn't get completely engulfed, and where right by a river, which they both insticually ran for.

But really, it's not about he force of the explosion that did the buildings in. It's the relentless jet fuel fire that degredated the steel, and the fact that there was a large gapping hole in the side of the building. Skyscrapers are a balancing act in steel and concrete. Take a large part of one wall and the top of the building will want to lean towards the side with the hole. That is a huge compressive strain on the center steel beams and a huge tensile strain on the opposite wall of where the hole is. On top of that you have jet fuel burning. While jet fuel in itself isn't enough to "melt" steel... it's more than enough to make it glow red and weaken it.

Also any fire retardant on the beams would have been stripped off the beams from the sheer amount of kinetic energy from the crash.

R00K said under one of the pictures that the fire burned up in a few minutes. When a jet crashes in the ocean in the middle of the day, the fuel can still be seen burning on the surface late into that same night. It's not going to just go out in a matter of minutes.

Post by **[xeno]Julios** » Sun Jun 19, 2005 4:41 am

lovely post pooinyourmouth. Really got a sense for the structural state of the building after its "wound", through your articulation.

One thing though (and i haven't read any of the thread really so maybe this question is useless) :

when the building fell in the videos, it seemed to collapse in on itself giving an illusion of telescopy.

The description you gave doesn't seem compatible with this sort of collapse, based on my own internal thought simulation - in my mind, I see the building sort of topple from the top half. The hole in that one side would create an asymmetry of force, and surely this asymmetry would be reflected in the dynamics of the collapse that it inspired.

btw is the controversy over WT1 or WT7? I'm really confused here heh