Quake3World

Freakaloin wrote:symetrical fall of a burning building is impossible...

it fell to the side, there are fucking photos of it. I'm sorry that Alex doesn't want you to see them and that you refuse to examine the other side's photographic evidence.

deal with it

R00k wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:Forensic experts in New York say they have identified body parts of two of the 10 hijackers who flew planes into the World Trade Center on 11 September 2001.

They have matched DNA body parts from 2 victims with some DNA samples that the FBI gave them.

In one article from early 2003, they claimed that the FBI lifted the samples from the van and hotel room the hijackers were using. In the 2005 article, the same department is quoted as saying they have no idea where the FBI got the evidence.

Do you have any more clarification on this?

Sounds like 2 years later someone who wasn't involved with the case had to respond to a question they didn't know the answer to. No?

Freakaloin wrote:symetrical fall of a burning building is impossible...

I'll qualify this before agreeing to it.

A burning building falling symmetrically into its footprint is conceivable -- if the fire is located in the center of the building, and subsequently weakens the support structure in the center, so that all walls are pulled inward onto each other.

You tell me - if a massive chunk of debris smashes through one side of a building, and that side is burning so hot that it actually weakens steel support beams on that side of the building, how is it that all other support beams around the circumference and center of the building allow the structure above them to collapse as easily as the area where the beams are physically weakened?

You can take an object as tall and as heavy as you would like to, with as much support as you would like to. If you weaken any part of the support structure on a single side - or even two sides - the collapse is going to occur in the direction of that weakened support. It is a fundamental principle of physics that all energy follows the path of least resistance, and that applies here as well. This doesn't change just because the building is really, really big.

If there is a 20-story hole in the side of a building, how is it conceivable that all 4 sides would fall at the same speed?

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

R00k wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:Forensic experts in New York say they have identified body parts of two of the 10 hijackers who flew planes into the World Trade Center on 11 September 2001.

They have matched DNA body parts from 2 victims with some DNA samples that the FBI gave them.

In one article from early 2003, they claimed that the FBI lifted the samples from the van and hotel room the hijackers were using. In the 2005 article, the same department is quoted as saying they have no idea where the FBI got the evidence.

Do you have any more clarification on this?

Sounds like 2 years later someone who wasn't involved with the case had to respond to a question they didn't know the answer to. No?

They interviewed Ellen Borakove - a spokeswoman for the New York Medical Examiner's Office - for both articles.

hey if wtc7 fell in it's footprint what was all that stuff falling onto/into 30 West Broadway which led to it's need to be demolished?

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

Freakaloin wrote:symetrical fall of a burning building is impossible...

it fell to the side, there are fucking photos of it. I'm sorry that Alex doesn't want you to see them and that you refuse to examine the other side's photographic evidence.

deal with it

Are the photos in that 134-page pdf?

R00k wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

R00k wrote: They have matched DNA body parts from 2 victims with some DNA samples that the FBI gave them.

In one article from early 2003, they claimed that the FBI lifted the samples from the van and hotel room the hijackers were using. In the 2005 article, the same department is quoted as saying they have no idea where the FBI got the evidence.

Do you have any more clarification on this?

Sounds like 2 years later someone who wasn't involved with the case had to respond to a question they didn't know the answer to. No?

They interviewed Ellen Borakove - a spokeswoman for the New York Medical Examiner's Office - for both articles.

Okay.You find this to be evidence of what?

R00k wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

Freakaloin wrote:symetrical fall of a burning building is impossible...

it fell to the side, there are fucking photos of it. I'm sorry that Alex doesn't want you to see them and that you refuse to examine the other side's photographic evidence.

deal with it

Are the photos in that 134-page pdf?

3 or 4 around page 99 somewhere afair

lol...puff is a moron...

GONNAFISTYA wrote:Just to reiterate what I believe to be a raging inferno compared to the single best image I could find of WTC 7's "raging inferno".

This is WTC 7's raging inferno:


These are other examples of raging infernos that I found on page one of a google image search for "raging inferno"











If we are to believe that the WTC 7's "less than a days" level of "raging inferno" is enough to collapse a modern, steel-framed skyscraper then it's fairly easy to come to the conclusion that other skyscrapers in history (which suffered a worse raging inferno than WTC 7...including the in 15 floor "raging inferno" of the First Interstate Bank building in Los Angleles which burned for 3 1/2 hours) should also have collapsed....but they didn't.




Like I said...this article doesn't really convince me.

and here's a movie...

http://www.911myths.com/wtc7moresmoke.avi

all wtc7. how can you say that's not raging? Couple it with testimony from firefighters who were there saying the fire engulfed whole floors.

what am I missing here?

rofl @ trying to argue physics with Fecalgroin.

maybe I'm missing something, the fire in the wtc wasn't quite a conventional building fire, since there was highly combustable jet fuel all over the place.

Also am I the only one who read that the fire weakened the support beams in a way that allowed the indivisual floors to give and gravitate on top of the floors underneath, which in turn started pilling up on eachother untill the weight could not be sustained anymore. I've also heard that the way the building/s were constructed (meaning the exterior shell WAS the supporting material unlike most other buildings) which could contribute to the uniform colapse.

btw I didn't read the article..woot

lol@themisinformed...

GONNAFISTYA wrote:J

If we are to believe that the WTC 7's "less than a days" level of "raging inferno" is enough to collapse a modern, steel-framed skyscraper then it's fairly easy to come to the conclusion that other skyscrapers in history (which suffered a worse raging inferno than WTC 7...including the in 15 floor "raging inferno" of the First Interstate Bank building in Los Angleles which burned for 3 1/2 hours) should also have collapsed....but they didn't.

see page 90-98 of the pdf

also see this...

http://www.911myths.com/html/progressive_collapse.html

http://www.911myths.com/html/madrid_windsor_tower.html

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:
Maybe rook or freak or someone could tell me what they feel is the (most) compelling evidence which indicates wt7 was demolished? (or the key pieces to the puzzle)

?

anyone?

why was there no seismic evidence of demolition? No initiating explosions heard? Why were there descriptions of the pancaking sound from multiple firemen?

lol...u need to read up a little more puff...hilariously ignorant...

Freakaloin wrote:lol...u need to read up a little more puff...hilariously ignorant...

don't have anything of substance at all to say do you freakaloon?

I don't want to get caught up in the discussion of planted explosives - as I said, they are tangents to the real issue in my opinion.

I will say, however, that I haven't seen some of the pictures you've provided before - have never seen any evidence that refutes the footprint-fall I have always heard described and seen evidence of in the past. So I'll continue to look at this stuff, and I may even be convinced thoroughly that there were no explosions involved. My opinions of that day have changed a dozen times since the events, and I expect they will continue to change as I see more things that I haven't seen before.

But I still want to stress that there are many more aspects to the events of 9/11 than whether the buildings were demolished, which has been my point throughout this thread.

There was evidence of foreknowledge, and there is evidence of a political whitewash and cover up, and these are the things that point to serious questions that remain to be answered, regardless of discussions about how the towers fell.

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:
how much significance does this point hold for you in the scheme of things?

oh - just that there is likely a reason why these photos are/were being held, and i'm curious as to why.

I personally have no convictions about what happened, but restricting public access to such evidence does raise red flags for me.

Another question - i remember reading about how some steel girders were found really far away from the building, and how gravity alone could not have facilitated such a trajectory. Any idea on this?

may have happened during the initial hit

Tsakali_ wrote:may have happened during the initial hit

i think it was during collapse - there's some discussion of it here i think:

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?s=1c ... ntry103805

for those of you that are sick of slickly produced 911 conspiracy videos with spooky hip-hop soundtracks, check this out:

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid= ... 7684&q=911

Foo wrote:

GONNAFISTYA wrote:I have to say...the thing about the whole article that made me pretty much dismiss it is the last several pages showing the faces of the fire fighters, police officers and Port Authority people who died that day.

To me, it had no other purpose than to say,"These conspiracy theorists are belitting the deaths of these people and if you believe them then you are also belittling their deaths."

This - to me - screams "propaganda article".

Yep. Just like when they played back the taped 911 calls from people inside the towers as part of the trial procedings.

Yeah, when was the last time you tapped a conversation.
Or had a conversation tapper ready in a world scale emergency?
In case one of the people you know get stuck in an accident and need voice taping?
To be used as support in a trial?

"Taped", not "tapped", you retard. All 911 calls are recorded.

99% chance of it being a typo :/