agreedvenom6 wrote:
But you know it better then as you are the americans..
QFTGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
agreedvenom6 wrote:
But you know it better then as you are the americans..
QFEGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
agreedvenom6 wrote:
But you know it better then as you are the americans..
We did elect these people remember, there is no mass government conspiracy.
If you'll refer to my earlier post, all of the claims made by conspiracy theorists can be easily proven false.
But if you prove them false, that just means you are part of the conspiracy.S.Lythberg wrote:
QFEGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
agreedvenom6 wrote:
But you know it better then as you are the americans..
We did elect these people remember, there is no mass government conspiracy.
If you'll refer to my earlier post, all of the claims made by conspiracy theorists can be easily proven false.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
oh noes!!!FEOS wrote:
But if you prove them false, that just means you are part of the conspiracy.S.Lythberg wrote:
QFEGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
agreed
We did elect these people remember, there is no mass government conspiracy.
If you'll refer to my earlier post, all of the claims made by conspiracy theorists can be easily proven false.
I'd better turn myself in...
so does that mean that popular mechanics magazine and the history channel are part of the conspiracy too?
asking that question obviously means you are part of the conspiracy.S.Lythberg wrote:
oh noes!!!FEOS wrote:
But if you prove them false, that just means you are part of the conspiracy.S.Lythberg wrote:
QFE
We did elect these people remember, there is no mass government conspiracy.
If you'll refer to my earlier post, all of the claims made by conspiracy theorists can be easily proven false.
I'd better turn myself in...
so does that mean that popular mechanics magazine and the history channel are part of the conspiracy too?
Then why am I so fucking poor?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
asking that question obviously means you are part of the conspiracy.S.Lythberg wrote:
oh noes!!!FEOS wrote:
But if you prove them false, that just means you are part of the conspiracy.
I'd better turn myself in...
so does that mean that popular mechanics magazine and the history channel are part of the conspiracy too?
these conspirators don't pay very well...
is what you want us to think. Im on to you.S.Lythberg wrote:
Then why am I so fucking poor?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
asking that question obviously means you are part of the conspiracy.S.Lythberg wrote:
oh noes!!!
I'd better turn myself in...
so does that mean that popular mechanics magazine and the history channel are part of the conspiracy too?
these conspirators don't pay very well...
that makes you my co-conspiratorGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
is what you want us to think. Im on to you.S.Lythberg wrote:
Then why am I so fucking poor?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
asking that question obviously means you are part of the conspiracy.
these conspirators don't pay very well...
what shall we secretly blow up next?
lol apparently there's no need for any more explosions, that one worked just fine
ƒ³
BlackKoala wrote:
Oh christ, this won't be interesting...
Last edited by ghettoperson (2008-01-09 18:48:39)
But then how will I advance the interests of the Christian-millitary-jewish-industrial-right wing-KGB-communist-nazi-communazi power structure?oug wrote:
lol apparently there's no need for any more explosions, that one worked just fine
nevermind, I just got back from trying out my new speedboat in the Persian Gulf, that seems to have done the trick...
Okay, that's it. Every conspiracy theorist just went down ∞ levels of respect in my view, which should be the most important thing in the world to you.
how doy you get the infinity symbol?DesertFox- wrote:
Okay, that's it. Every conspiracy theorist just went down ∞ levels of respect in my view, which should be the most important thing in the world to you.
its a free mason symbol. he's sending a message. rookie.
GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
its a free mason symbol. he's sending a message. rookie.
Novus Oro Seclorum! New World Order!!!
its all a conspiracy!!!!
I'll be in my bunker, preparing for the coup.
It is obviously a secret message, just as this is. However, to get symbols one can simply go into the Microsoft Word symbols dealie and then copy and paste from there. ۩ Σ ± √ ß ü → ♠ ♣ ♥ ♦ ♫ ♂ Α Ω
is something apparently supposed to happen on March 15th? Cos Id sure hate for it to spoil my birthday.
Christian right-wing communist? This must be new.S.Lythberg wrote:
But then how will I advance the interests of the Christian-millitary-jewish-industrial-right wing-KGB-communist-nazi-communazi power structure?oug wrote:
lol apparently there's no need for any more explosions, that one worked just fine
nevermind, I just got back from trying out my new speedboat in the Persian Gulf, that seems to have done the trick...
ƒ³
Dude....maybe.BlackKoala wrote:
Dude....no.venom6 wrote:
Regurgitated stuff.S.Lythberg wrote:
this post was BS 6 months ago, and it's still BS now
The twin towers were brought down by impacts from two jet aircraft piloted by radical muslim terrorists, that is what happened, and that is all that happened.
Okay, there's a difference between watching videos and agreeing, and watching videos and understanding.
Regurgitating facts is cool and everything but doesn't help your cause.
Here's why 9/11 doesn't make sense in my mind.
As you can see when the planes first hit the buildings, a giant fireball explodes outwards behind the plane, much of (one would assume) is jet fuel. Jet fuel burns at:
Okay, now if one assumes that not all of the jet fuel was expelled and burned up on impact, that would mean it would still be burning inside of the building. If it burns at between 800° to 1500°F as stated above that means that the steel would lose roughly "50 percent" of it's strength (as said in Popular Mechanics). That would be enough for the steel to collapse. That being said, the steel holding up the building below the fire was still more than capable of bearing the weight it had been bearing for years. It would, in theory, at least resist the falling of the upper portion, meaning that instead of the entire building collapsing in on itself, the building above where the steel collapsed would collapse (maybe it would fall off, maybe it would collapse and 1 or 2 floors would be crushed). You can see why it doesn't make sense that both buildings fell at free fall speeds (meaning that there was no resistance put up by the floors below). If the building collapsed by itself, each floor would resist collapsing and the building would stutter as it fell, not flow at the rate that gravity was pulling it down at. [By stating this I am assuming that the calculations were done correctly by those who claim that the building fell at roughly free fall speed, or, 9.8m/s downwards.]PM wrote:
800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F) Popular Mechanics
Another fact that supports the claim that 9/11 was a conspiracy is that there was molten steel seen flowing both out of the buildings before they collapsed and within the wreckage after. Some sources claim that the smoldering pile of rubble maintained a temperature above 1500°F (the temperature at which jet fuel burns) for as much as a weak and may have been as high as ~2500°F. As said before, no burning jet fuel could have brought the steel to a temperature of 2750°F and I highly doubt that the combination of burning jet fuel and pressure could get the steel to enter a liquid state. Why is this important? Because molten steel could have theoretically been produced by a compound called thermite (a mixture of aluminum and iron oxide that reacts and gives off enormous amounts of energy... more than enough needed to melt the steel - I guess thermate could have been used too?). Now I don't know what the demolition industry uses to demolish buildings, but thermite sure could have produce steel beams that look like this (see the diagonally cut/melted beam directly behind the fireman), and a collapse wouldn't have. (for more information on thermite and thermate from a professor who looked for trace amounts of the aluminum/iron product of a thermite/ate reaction look here.
The collapse of WTC 7 is questionable as well, buildings don't fall because they are hit by debris and are smoldering. None of the other buildings around the towers did. If nothing else has you questioning, the definitely sould because out of all of the evidence out there -- there's no denying the fact that WTC 7 should not have fallen under any circumstances.
Last edited by CommieChipmunk (2008-01-09 19:09:32)
the ides of march is when we kill the king on the steps of the senate...adam1503 wrote:
is something apparently supposed to happen on March 15th? Cos Id sure hate for it to spoil my birthday.
☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭☭DesertFox- wrote:
It is obviously a secret message, just as this is. However, to get symbols one can simply go into the Microsoft Word symbols dealie and then copy and paste from there. ۩ Σ ± √ ß ü → ♠ ♣ ♥ ♦ ♫ ♂ Α Ω
Julius Caeser was stabbed to death on my birthday!S.Lythberg wrote:
the ides of march is when we kill the king on the steps of the senate...adam1503 wrote:
is something apparently supposed to happen on March 15th? Cos Id sure hate for it to spoil my birthday.
All things are possible in BF2s.oug wrote:
Christian right-wing communist? This must be new.S.Lythberg wrote:
But then how will I advance the interests of the Christian-millitary-jewish-industrial-right wing-KGB-communist-nazi-communazi power structure?oug wrote:
lol apparently there's no need for any more explosions, that one worked just fine
nevermind, I just got back from trying out my new speedboat in the Persian Gulf, that seems to have done the trick...
collapse at low temp fire:CommieChipmunk wrote:
scroll up to read it again.
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/01 … -0112.htmlIt is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. It was noted above that the wind load controlled the design allowables. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.
The additional problem was distortion of the steel in the fire. The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire.
As for molten metals, aluminum from the airframe and non-structural elements would melt at 650°C, and smouldering elements in the rubble (which do come close to the mechanics of the thermite reaction in an oxygen poor environment) could have easily melted many of the metallic elements over the long period of time taken to remove the debris
building 7 (Manuel Garcia Jr, physicist and engineer, presents his three separate reports):
http://www.counterpunch.org/darkfire11282006.htmlThe upper block of WTC 1 drops into the burning impact zone and ejects a cascade of incandescent metal and heated stone laterally, from near the 97th story (368 m), at between 12 m/s (27 mph) to 15 m/s (34 mph) during the 1.5 seconds it takes to fall down to the original height of the 71st story (269 m). (3)
This hot volley, within the overall pyroclastic cannonade discharged by WTC 1 during its collapse, hurtles at 86 m/s (193 mph) at a steep angle down into the face of WTC 7 from Floors 18 to zero. A solid missile -- a hot section of I-beam? -- punches into Floors 11 and 12, bursting through the concrete floors and touching off fires. The elevator shafts at Floors 8 and 9, about 10 to 15 m (33 to 49 ft) into the building, are ruptured and the elevator cars fall out onto the floors. The air pressure wave presses on eardrums, stairwells fill with dust and smoke, and lights go out, the building shakes for nearly 10 seconds; magnitude 2.3.
damaged, and on fire, 7 collapsed due to the same mechanics of the main towers.
as for the free fall speeds of the building's collapse, skyscrapers are 95% air by volume, you find me a collapse (controlled or otherwise) that does not occur at nearly 9.8m/s
Last edited by S.Lythberg (2008-01-09 20:09:27)