Dream Spa
Toronto Escorts

Pentagon Attacks

baci2004

Bad girl Luv'r
Mar 21, 2004
2,573
1
36
53
At the range!!!
So if it was a missle, what does that tell us or prove??
 

Goober Mcfly

Retired. -ish
Oct 26, 2001
10,125
11
38
NE
baci2004 said:
So if it was a missle, what does that tell us or prove??
What if it was a car-bomb? Or a guy with really bad gas? Or what if the Pentagon wasn't really attacked, and all the reporters and the military people were all actors on a sound stage in Hollywood and the Pentagon that we saw with a smoking hole in it was actually a remarkably detailed scale model?

*adjusts tin-foil hat*
 

Goober Mcfly

Retired. -ish
Oct 26, 2001
10,125
11
38
NE
From the thread hdog posted
I understand that DNA disappears above 120 degrees Fahrenheit.
Hahahahahahahaha! That's why they can't solve any murders in Phoenix AZ!

*polishes tin-foil hat again*

People, what's harder to believe? That a bunch of religious nutjobs hijacked a bunch of airliners and crashed them into buildings, or that there is a vast government conspiracy which involved technological advances never discussed before, secrets being kept by thousands of people and a government nutty enough to kill thousands of their own for very little gain?

*pokes Occam with a razor*
 

langeweile

Banned
Sep 21, 2004
5,086
0
0
In a van down by the river
Some of theses rumours supports one of my favorite theories.
Pot might be harmless, but it does make you paranoid. Scary to think that some former pot users are in position of power now...AAARRGGGHHH.
Some of the more persistent theories are from the 60's and 70's...yikes
Current posters are excluded...I hope...
 

happygrump

Once more into the breach
May 21, 2004
820
0
0
Waterloo Region
hdog said:
First, the fires simply weren't hot enough.
They only had to be hot enough to cause the trusses between the floors to collapse. Heated metal weakens, but the metal doesn't have to melt to break down.
hdog said:
For the FEMA endorsed pancake theory to be correct would still require more heat than was present and in order for a floor to fall hundreds of joints had to break simultaneously.
Wrong again. Only one floor has to collapse. The mass of the floors above the collapsed floor acts as a ram to the floor beneath the collapsed floor, which rams the floor beneath that, and so on, adding mass and energy as it falls. High school physics, my friend: F=ma.
hdog said:
And at the rate the buildings fell there had to be almost no resistance at any floor.
See above.
hdog said:
And as improbable as all that is it still doesn't explain where the energy came from to cause the bulidings to spew debris and to turn the concrete to powder.
Actually, it does. The force of all that mass collapsing from that height is plenty.

Remember that when we watch the controlled destructions of buildings on TV (or, if you're lucky enough, in real life), the charges that collapse the buildings are relatively small. The mass of the building and the height from which the buildings fall creates enough energy to demolish the structure.

hdog said:
Then add the seizmograph readings before the towers fell, the survivor and eye-witness reports of bombs going off in the towers...
Haven't heard about the siesmographs readings, but enough material was burning in the buildings that undoubtedly there were bursting water tanks, electrical panels and so forth.
hdog said:
rubble and steel was hauled away (by the same company that demolished a buried, under 24 hour guard, the federal building in the Oklahoma city bombing case) without a proper investigation.
All the steel that was gathered from the site was put in a holding area while the investigtations were taking place. I think it was in an area of Battery Park, but I'm not 100% sure about that.

The shadowy world of conspiracy theorists is one that does not allow for reason and good sense. Any evidence to the contrary of the so-called conspiracy automatically generates accusations of being involved in the conspiracy. There's no way for reason to prevail.
 

Ranger68

New member
Mar 17, 2003
3,665
0
0
ROTFLMFAO!
Oh, mercy.
*sniff*
That made my day.
LOL
I'm gonna be laughing for days.
:D
 

Exclusive

New member
Nov 22, 2004
11
0
0
first of all, that snopes thing is bull. aluminum can't "burn up". the most it can do is melt. aluminum would have to reach a temperature of about 2700 degrees fahrenheit to "burn up". 2700 degrees fahrenheit is the approximate boiling point of aluminum. boiling point is the temperature in which a liquid turns to a gas. so to burn up, or not be seen it would have to turn to a gas. if only melted, aluminum would become solid again and clearly visible shortly after. the fires would be making the metal too hot. it would have to be cleaned up in buckets, and u'd still see lots of glowing red melted aluminum on the lawn. there is none. and once the fires go out... the aluminum will become solid again.

They only had to be hot enough to cause the trusses between the floors to collapse. Heated metal weakens, but the metal doesn't have to melt to break down.
weeken it yes... but you must remember... buildings are built to be MUCH stronger than they need to be. it's a rule of artichitecture. now first of all... like hdog said, the fuel for the most part burnt up immediately. after the fuel is gone, ur left with fires of about 500 degrees fahrenheit... that's NOTHING to steel. steel could take that like a kevlar vest takes a tiny .22 derenger... now even IF it was possible to collapse like that... you'd FIRST noticably see the building start to buckle...
now historical example: 1992 (i think) there was a building fire in philadlphia, EIGHT floors were COMPLETELY on fire... raging in flames... it did not collapse after hours and hours of being on fire. it was a building similar to the size of WTC 7.

[/QUOTE]Wrong again. Only one floor has to collapse. The mass of the floors above the collapsed floor acts as a ram to the floor beneath the collapsed floor, which rams the floor beneath that, and so on, adding mass and energy as it falls. High school physics, my friend: F=ma.[/QUOTE]

first of all, you're using the wrong law. quiz for you: what has more force, an 11 lb. piece of steel resting on the ground, or a 10 lb. piece of metal that's been falling for 5 seconds and has reached a velocity of 49 m/s?
if you guessed the falling piece of metal at 49 m/s, you're wrong. F = ma. a = 9.8 whether ur falling or sitting still. it's called ur weight. i weigh 115 lbs. whether im sitting still or skydiving, falling thru the air.
now, to talk about MOMENTUM, which is what u meant to speak of. momentum = m*v. but after falling a mere 10 ft, an object will only be traveling 17.3 MPH. that's not very fast. HIGH SCHOOL PHYSICS, MY FRIEND. that momentum, when hit the floor below will get distributed throughout the tower. now only the floor that collapses will collapse... the ones above it dont... according to the pancake theory... thats ONE floor hitting a floor below it. the energy of the falling floor will get distributed THROUGHOUT all the lower floors... dont forget u have about 80 floors below to distribute the energy too... and dont forget the structure of the towers... the support columns START at the bottom at a thickness of 2"... then taper away to 1/4 inch at the top... that's a LOT of steel on those lower 80 floors to get the energy distributed to. HIGH SCHOOL PHYSICS, MY FRIEND.

Remember that when we watch the controlled destructions of buildings on TV (or, if you're lucky enough, in real life), the charges that collapse the buildings are relatively small. The mass of the building and the height from which the buildings fall creates enough energy to demolish the structure.
what you state here is correct. the charges are small. but the explosives create enough heat to melt steel. explosives create temperatures of about 3000 degrees fahrenheit. steel's melting point can be estimated at 2850 degrees fahrenheit. you also have to remember, MOST controlled demolitions set a charge at nearly every joint. that's because it's designed to blow out floor by floor, making it so all the steel gets broken up into small pieces, and the building falls into its footprint. the towers fell into their footprints.

Yours truly,
Exclusive
 

Exclusive

New member
Nov 22, 2004
11
0
0
Haven't heard about the siesmographs readings, but enough material was burning in the buildings that undoubtedly there were bursting water tanks, electrical panels and so forth.
gimme a break... a truck rolling past would create more of a seismographic impression than a bursting water tank or an electrical pannel.

now as for the collapsing to dust. ONLY explosives could do that. nothing else. there wouldn't be so much of a dust cloud if it just collapsed. now also if it just collapsed, u'd see steel pieces as big as houses. dude, more physics for you: METAL IS MALLEABLE. this means that u have to bend it back and forth before you can break it. notice how when u take the tab off a soda can, u usually have to jiggle it back and forth. that's the idea. u would get very uneven pieces of steel, some as big as houses if an actual collapse like they see did happen. think about that one. the steel was in pieces like 10-20 ft long... u'd have partially assembled portions of steel there... they'd be bent, but still in tact.

The shadowy world of conspiracy theorists is one that does not allow for reason and good sense. Any evidence to the contrary of the so-called conspiracy automatically generates accusations of being involved in the conspiracy. There's no way for reason to prevail.
no. wrong. evidence is well taken. but being a physical scientifical person i am, i choose the smoking gun. SCIENCE is always the smoking gun... you could either believe the "religion" (govt's official story) or you could believe the clear scientific evidence.

Yours truly,
Exclusive
 

Ranger68

New member
Mar 17, 2003
3,665
0
0
You guys just keep on coming.
LOL
Now you're passing yourselves off as scientists. LOL That may be more credible if you learned how to capitalize at the beginning of a sentence.
;)
ROTFLMFAO
 

Exclusive

New member
Nov 22, 2004
11
0
0
now elaborating on the steel burning up thing. for something to actually catch on fire, that thing needs a HIGH carbon content. if you didnt know, the 2 products of fire are PURE carbon (soot, ash, smoke) and a gas, usually nitrogen. now metal can't catch on fire. the only way u can make it seem like it is is if u put an accelerant on it (ie oil, fuel, gasoline of some type). this will make it seem like the metal is on fire, when really the gasoline itself is on fire. once the gasoline stops burning, the fire will completely go out... and the metal will still be there intact, because the metal itself doesnt burn. after a few minutes the metal will cool, and if melted (like in aluminum's case, which has a fairly low melting point of around 600 or so degrees celcius...) it will harden again. thus metal doesnt burn up.
 

Exclusive

New member
Nov 22, 2004
11
0
0
Ranger68 said:
You guys just keep on coming.
LOL
Now you're passing yourselves off as scientists. LOL That may be more credible if you learned how to capitalize at the beginning of a sentence.
;)
ROTFLMFAO
i dont care about capitalizing at the beginning of sentences. im writing on a message board, not on an english essay that i'll be handing in. if you do not believe me, u can look up all the stuff i looked up and do the research that i took months doing...
 

strange1

Guest
Mar 14, 2004
807
0
0
Exclusive said:
... dude, more physics for you: METAL IS MALLEABLE. this means that u have to bend it back and forth before you can break it. notice how when u take the tab off a soda can, u usually have to jiggle it back and forth. ...
Actually, maleable means that the material can be worked, specificaly made into a flat sheet. The bending back and forth is called fatigue. As you cold work a metal (such as bending a pop can tab), you are actually changing the physical properties of the metal, making it more brittle as the bending creates internal heat.

The pancake theory for the WTC has nothing to do with the floor hitting the floor together. The design of the WTC used the floors as a load bearing member, holding the walls together. When one floor collapsed, the floor below is subjected to extra stress. After one or two floors fall, the remaining floors are stressed beyond their maximum strength.

I don't have the data in front of me but i'm pretty sure contained jet fuel fed with ample oxygen burns much hotter than 500 F.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts