9/11 Conspiracy Thread (There can be only one!)

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Stryder, Aug 3, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ganymede Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,322
    Day after day, week after week, month after month. Soon to be Year after Year.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    I can believe that witnesses may have confused molten iron for molten steel. However, I think it's safe to say that the iron -came- from the steel. The most prominent evidence that there was molten iron comes from before the collapse itself. There is only one claim that I have only guessed at a solution, and I've requested more information on that particular issue here:
    http://letsrollforums.com/debunker-claim-molten-iron-t18041.html?p=160507#post160507

    Good question.


    With the exception I've already mentioned.


    There were claims that the thermate (or perhaps it was thermite, both may have been used) was still reacting with the metal. Also, I believe that the fact that much of the rubble was buried would have allowed it to retain its heat.


    Extremely unlikely if fire was what brought down the building. Not so if it were explosives.


    Where was it contradicted? Furthermore, I agree that it would have left a lot more evidence, particularly in the steel. Sadly, most of the steel was carted off before anyone got a chance to analyze it...
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    I would argue that the truth is frequently hard to find. If it were so simple, corruption wouldn't exist; we'd all have moved beyond it. I believe Richard Dawkins, a noted biologist, has made the argument that the search for truth as well as the art of deception is something that's been with higher order animals for quite some time now.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    Who said I was taking it to be true? I merely mentioned it as a possibility.


    I'd argue it's more the other way around (official story believers...). After all, many 9/11 alternate story believers (such as myself, Steven Jones, the creator or 9/11 mysteries) originally believed the official story. It was only after closely examing the facts that they found that the official story was full of holes.


    I never said that Paul Isaac saw anything, although he may have, being stationed so close to the buildings. What the above report makes clear, however, is that he is claiming that other firefighters know there were bombs in the buildings. If you want a more in depth look at all the evidence that firefighters heard explosions, I suggest you take a look at the following articles:
    http://www.wingtv.net/paulisaac.html

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_firefighters.html


    I have seen no evidence that he is ill-informed on the subject. In 2007, it can be seen that he was still showing evidence that suggest 9/11 was an inside job:
    ******************************************
    Prothink Interviews NYC First Responder Paul Isaac

    Leticia Martinez/Nierika
    Sat, 24 Nov 2007 13:42:08 -0800

    http://www.prothink.org/

    Saturday, November 24, 2007
    Prothink Interviews NYC First Responder Paul Isaac

    CLICK HERE FOR THE INTERVIEW
    http://prothink.podomatic.com/

    PICTURE TAKEN OF PAUL ISAAC AND MIKE DELANEY AT WTC
    GROUND ZERO, NEW YORK, NY 9/11/2007
    Paul is going to be presenting evidence of 9/11 to the courts and would like your support if you are in the Brooklyn area. This will be going on at the Brooklyn Circuit Court December 7th, 2007. He requests that people come to support him in his efforts to obtain justice for 9/11/01. Here is some of the evidence he will be presenting:
    More Unanswered Questions re: Keyspan Tanks

    Paul Isaac is an Auxiliary Fireman and first responder. He has spent an untold number of hours doing in-depth research compiling many areas of evidence challenging the official account of 9/11.

    The image below illustrates a parallel between the demolition of the Keyspan Maspeth Holding Tanks in Queens, NY on July 15th, just a few months before 9/11. Although explosives were outlawed, somehow with the Giuliani administration in power, this demolition was carried out even though the surrounding area was residential. You can still see the Queens Gazette article from 7/18/01 here.

    Also,

    The height of the tanks is approximately the same as the height from where Flight 175 struck the south tower and the top of the building. The angle of the collapse of the South Tower (see Image 2) was almost identical to the angle of the demolition-cased collapse of the tanks (see Image 3). Also, the antenna from Tower One came down in the same direction, into Tobin Plaza rather than west towards the World Financial Centers. The demolition of the tanks was planned and carried out by Controlled Demolition, Inc.

    Isn't it interesting that this company also was contracted to do the cleanup after the Oklahoma City Bombing, then again for cleanup of the World Trade Center towers? Also, see the Online Journal article here by Jerry Mazza.
    ****************************************
    http://www.mail-archive.com/cia-drugs@yahoogroups.com/msg09508.html


    However, if you trust engineers more, you may want to look at the following article:
    **Seven Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists Call for New 9/11 Investigation – Official Account of 9/11 "Impossible", "Hogwash", "Fatally Flawed" **
    Dec. 13, 2007 PDF Version Article on OpEdNews
     
  8. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    Holy shit on a shingle!!!!! Quick!!! Someone take a fucking picture of the screen...cause that right thar is rarer than seeing Bigfoot playing football with Jimmy Hoffa.

    My Boy, Scott...I believe, has just conceded a point. Don't turn back now Scott!!!! Run towards the light!! Run Scott run!!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    Paul Isaac spoke of it in 2005:
    *********************************************
    Also, Isaac directly addressed the gag order placed on firemen and police officers in Szymanski’s article:

    “It’s amazing how many people are afraid to talk for fear of retaliation or losing their jobs,” said Isaac, regarding the FBI gag order placed on law enforcement and fire department officials, preventing them from openly talking about any inside knowledge of 9/11.
    *********************************************
    http://www.wingtv.net/paulisaac.html


    When did I ever say that he felt that he had definite proof? I can certainly agree that he heard 'what sounded like bombs'. If you want to take a more in depth look at what Cacchioli had to say and his dislike of the way the 9/11 commission handled his testimony, you may want to look here:
    "NY Fireman Lou Cacchioli Says 9/11 Comission Twisted His Words"
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/200705twistedwords.htm
     
  10. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    Question for all who post or lurk this thread:

    Would anyone have any objection to me asking the Mod to close this thread, and move say..the last 3 or 4 pages to a new "9/11 Conspiracy Thread - Mark II"

    I sometimes view this thread on my mobile phone, on the way to work, and trying to navigate the pages without a mouse can be difficult with soooo many pages.

    Any objections?
     
  11. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    MacGyver, are you driving while you are attempting to access this thread?
     
  12. MetaKron Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,502
    I'm repeating myself, but I still think that it would have been too inconvenient and pointless to make the attempt to use enough thermite to create long-lasting pools of liquid steel. Has anyone observed this at other demolition sites? Omaha took down a 40 story bank building by implosion a few years ago. Simple impact is enough to melt metals.
     
  13. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    I looked up the term on wikipedia. In the U.S., it is defined thusly:
    "Hearsay is the legal term that describes statements made outside of court or other judicial proceedings."

    By that account, most of the official story is hearsay as well; after all, they didn't make it in a court or other 'judicial proceedings'. Here are what I find are the relevant statements from my quote above. Do you disagree with any of them? If so, why?

    1- Janette MacKinlay is a visual artist, and a survivor of the World Trade Center attacks.

    2- On September 11th, she watched the drama unfold from her apartment across the street from the World Trade Center.

    3- Jim, a sculptor who shared the apartment, settled in to observe what was happening, thinking that the towers would burn "all day."

    4- When they started to come down, he warned Janette and they quickly hurried out their door as the debris shattered their windows and filled their apartment with dust and debris.

    5- Janette also significantly contributed to our scientific understanding of the destruction of the towers, because she saved some of the dust that filled her apartment and passed it on to Steven Jones for analysis.


    A 'suspicious mote'? What's a 'mote'? Also, what do you find 'suspicious'?


    She believed that the official story was full of holes, as do I. What's your point?


    For starters, do you even have any evidence that the analysis was delayed?


    In your mind perhaps. I and others disagree.
     
  14. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    You can't even come up with a theory?


    Because their case is so full of holes and they constantly seem to want to obscure the truth.

    I heard of that. What's your point?


    I'm not sure what you're demanding anymore. You want to know who supplied Steven Jones with his sample. I tell you. You want to know why she supplied it. I tell you. You want to know why she collected the sample to begin with; I tell you. Now you seem to think she somehow managed to get a sample of thermate spherules just to undermine the official story, which you apparently belive is God's given truth.

    Mackinlay's samples are not even the only spherules that were found, despite Rudi Giuliani's haste to remove all the debris:
    *******************************
    An earlier study notes the presence in the WTC dust of significant “metallic particles (mostly Ti and Fe [iron], although Zn, lead (Pb), Ba, and Cu were also found).”45 The USGS “Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust” shows micrographs of a few metallic spherules which they also observed in the dust (see especially Iron-03 and Iron-04.)46
    *******************************
    www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf


    I have claimed none of these things. Please stick to the facts Geoff.


    Why does it strike you as highly unlikely?


    Steven Jones simply goes where the evidence leads him. Something you seem to have a hard time doing...


    So you think you can cook some up?


    Ok. Sometimes I get a bit frustrated, but I must admit that different people think differently.


    I'm simply trying to understand you better. Are you -really- a Marxist-Leninist?


    Very funny. Alright, perhaps he did announce his findings in 2007. If so, I don't know why he took more then a year. However, I think the findings themselves are far more important then how long it took for him to get them.


    The article simply pointed to the possibility that a controlled demolition may have taken place, with nano thermite being a possible explosive that was used, and that the NIST should test for it.

    Evidence given by Steven Jones based on a sample of the WTC dust further corroborates this possibility. Yes, yes, you can believe that an artist, whose apartment was -filled- with WTC dust, got rid of all that and managed to get hold of some thermate, use it to make some iron rich spherules with the tell tale thermate fingerprint and pretend that -that- was the dust that was in her apartment. Why she would do this, even you can't say, but hey, it would mean you wouldn't have to question the official story.
     
  15. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    Ok, continue laughing. I don't remember anything about a woman who took a picture, and I am more liable to believe that it was certain people in the clean up operations, as you said, not everyone, and more the heads of them then everyone in them. As to the witnesses of the pentagon plane crash, it has been argued in thepentacon.com that the plane apparently did a low flyover of the pentagon just as explosives were detonated within the pentagon, creating the illusion that the plane crashed in the pentagon, when in fact it merely flew over it. I have now heard that atleast 1 person apparently saw the flyover, apparently from one of the creators of thepentacon.com.

    After having seen some stuff from Jonathan Barnett, for instance, it has led me to believe that he may have had little if anything to do with it; he actually seemed to be protesting that they removed the evidence so quickly and there is evidence that the investigators had no authority to keep the debris for a closer examination. Rudi Giuliani, on the other hand, seems to be a person who was integral in removing the debris at a rapid pace.

    In any case, you may want to have a look at this:
    ************************************
    ZERO : Europe for an Independent Inquiry into 9/11
    BRUSSELS, European Parliament, 26th February 2008.

    Mark Dermul (www.911belgium.be) reporting.

    On Tuesday 26th February, Europarlementarian Guilietto Chiesa invited his colleagues and the press to attend the screening and debate of the Italian-produced documentary named ‘ZERO, an investigation into the events of 9/11’. Object of the screening was to create political awareness of the faulty official investigation into the events by the 9/11 Commission.

    Besides Mr Chiesa, the panel consisted of Japanese parlementarian Fujita, Dr David Ray Griffin, film distributor Tim Sparke & the director and producers of the film.

    After his opening statements, Mr Chiesa welcomed his guest speakers, including the producers, director and distributor of the documentary. Mr Chiesa pointed out that he was unable to find any distributor in his native country of Italy and was happy to find a company in the UK, led by Mr Tim Sparke, to handle worldwide distribution of this important film. ‘It is important to realize,’ he emphasized ‘that the movie was made thanks to contribution and donations of hundreds of citizens who feel a new investigation is more than warranted.’ No less than 450 people worked on this documentary on a voluntary basis. They never received any kind of payment. Their reward is the movie itself, which they feel is an instrument to create awareness and a means to provoke a political debate in Europe...
    ************************************
    The article continues here:
    http://www.911blogger.com/node/14103
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2008
  16. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    MacGyver, this isn't the first time that I've 'conceded a point'. However, I notice that you failed to respond to the -rest- of my post. I invite you to do so; it's all here:
    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2063944&postcount=1703
     
  17. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    I've wanted to split this thread up since the threads I started with were put into this 'mighty tangle'. If you look at the first post in this thread, you'll see that the argument for having everything in one thread is that "9/11 Conspiracist's have been over killing the forum". The solution, in my view, is rather simple; create a forum that is tailored for conspiracists alone. Other posters who are here for topics -other- then conspiracies also agreed. The admins preferred to spend their time disagreeing with alternate story theories instead of addressing the issue at hand and that's where it ended.
     
  18. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    LOL...no..I ride a city bus to work..it's an hour and half ride each way.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    As far as I know, nano thermites have never been used in demolitions before. Why nano thermites were used, I don't know. How much nano thermite was used and whether or not other explosives were used in conjunction is also an unknown.

    I believe Steven Jones puts it well in his conclusion of his "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?":
    ******************************************
    None of the government-funded studies have provided serious analyses of the explosive demolition hypothesis at all. Until the above steps are taken, the case for accusing ill-trained Muslims of causing all the destruction on 9-11-01 is far from compelling. It just does not add up.

    And that fact should be of great concern to Americans. (Ryan, 2004). Clearly, we must find out what really caused the WTC skyscrapers to collapse as they did.

    To this end, NIST must release the 6,899 photographs and over 300 hours of video recordings — acquired mostly by private parties — which it admits to holding (NIST, 2005, p. 81). In particular, photos and analyses of the molten metal (probably not molten steel) observed in the basements of both Towers and WTC7 need to be brought forth to the international community of scientists and engineers immediately. Therefore, along with others, I call for the release of these and all relevant data for scrutiny by a cross-disciplinary, international team of researchers. The explosive-demolition hypothesis will be considered: all options will be on the table.
    ******************************************
    http://physics911.net/stevenjones


    Omaha? In any case, even NIST doesn't believe that the impact and the fires melted anything other then aluminum. Which is why it can't admit that any metal (other then molten aluminum) was ever found. It also seems to be why it's refusing to release the "6,899 photographs and over 300 hours of video recordings — acquired mostly by private parties — which it admits to holding (NIST, 2005, p. 81)"
     
  20. shaman_ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,467
    http://www.nomoregames.net/911/helping_jones/600_v_1000.jpg

    http://www.alliedmetalcompany.com/

    http://www.uhigh.ilstu.edu/tech/tech gallery.htm

    http://www.bn.saint-gobain.com/Data...ation_edit.asp?ele_ch_id=A0000000000000001326

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/1280681.html?page=2

    It isn't that dark in these photos and there is definitely a glow.

    Interestingly if you look at this picture
    http://www.debunking911.com/capture7.jpg

    wouldn’t you say the drops near the bottom which are cooler are more silvery?

    By ‘many’ scientists you mean a few people mentioned on the internet who are not experts in that field and won’t ever submit this work to a relevant peer reviewed journal.

    There is no evidence that the fire reached temperatures to melt iron or steel.


    That does not answer the question at all.



    Can you see the steel melting?

    It has already been pointed out to you how stupid that is. Photographs from different angles confirm the bowing. From http://www.debunking911.com/sag.htm


    “Here conspiracy theorists seem to want it both ways: they want to say light refracted due to the heat, yet they also say the fires were almost out toward the end when the bow was greatest. They need to have it both ways but they can't.”

    You wouldn’t rule out missiles, nuclear bombs or death rays either.



    No a few pieces were found but most of the plane was in the building.




    So why do you keep spamming cherry picked comments on the temperatures recorded?

    What, in all your years of investigating fires?

    For the 62nd time you have been shown a steel building which collapsed due to a paper fire and you have been shown a bridge which collapsed when a gas tanker crashed. You will no doubt ignore these and head back to your conspiracy sites to maintain your religion.

    You have no idea where the steel beams were from. The ones I am referring to were mentioned in the articles regarding Prof Astaneh-Asl.

    Scott it was that very comment that Mackey was addressing.


    Wow good graphics?! Scott you spam so much nonsense over and over I’m not going to read an article on your suggestion. I will look at various points though.

    ?


    Only in the eyes of a gullible lazy conspiracy theorist. Mackey’s document is pretty much the definitive debunking on all of Griffin’s claims and I think a few others are in there. The crackpots have returned fire with that one page which I think Mackey may have even addressed in the second version of his document.


    Where was the good point in that? They are making excuses why they are too scared or inept to reply to Mackey’s essay in entirety and then just whine on that he is debunking them.


    ooh look smoke (rising)! ?

    You claimed “its capabilities have been proven.”. Show me nanosuperultramegathermite demolishing something as an example.

    Yes small fires.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Just a little campfire put it out with an extinguisher.. nothing to see here people move along.

    Only one floor needed to fail for the collapse to start.

    But you are still evading or not getting my point. Explosives blow things up don’t they? They could be used to damage a structure, not just heat it up. So does an explosive explain softened steel?

    How can you read that without laughing? The squibs thing was debunked years ago. A straightforward hypothesis? Flying a plane into a building secretly loaded with invisible explosives which aren’t even that effective for demolition and they have to go off in perfect timing starting on the floors the plane had to hit to create an appearance that the building is collapsing. Even though it has been demonstrated that fire alone can weaken steel they have to use secret explosives because if the building didn’t collapse the conspiracy wouldn’t work.. The government, firemen, police, media, NIST, scrap yards, fema, norad ect ect are all behind it keeping it secret. Yeah pretty straightforward. … It’s so simple really.


    That’s because you are a religious nut. Please point out which picture makes it clear it was a CD.

    Squibs for one. Scott I, and others, have posted articles which address his claims. You won’t read them. It’s like trying to convince a priest that god doesn’t exist.


    Even though there isn’t one witness who saw that plane fly over the pentagon and there is no evidence for explosives….

    lol right.


    The point was that the crew there did not come to a conclusion that had anything to do with the amazing temperatures required for evaporating steel.

    The steel was at the site for six months! There was nothing hasty about it’s removal. The investigators had access to all the steel at the scrap yards. Leave the fantasy behind and come back to reality.

    :wallbang:
     
  21. shaman_ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,467
    Post a link to the photos or video please.



    Supermegathermite doesn’t react for that long. Even if it did it would require a ridiculous amount to do so. So no not relevant.

    Extremely unlikely considering there is no reliable evidence for temperatures that high or for explosives.


    http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2001/10/47357

    “Astaneh-Asl -- who has had access to 40,000 tons of scrap”

    Plenty of the steel was analyzed. Stop trying to pretend everything is suspicious.

    You are claiming that there was molten and evaporated steel though.


    We have examined these ‘holes’ and they don’t stand up to scrutiny.

    Scott, once again if other firefighters ‘know’ that there were bombs responsible for killing their friends then why don’t they say something? If you say because they are scared to lose their jobs I am going to reach though the monitor and slap you. I can do it.

    All you have is someone saying he heard that firefighters knew there were bombs. If that is all you have then you don’t have anything.

    Isaac has no actual evidence himself though does he? Please answer this question without cutting and pasting someone else’s work.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7440129306993364432&pl=true

    I’ve posted this before but I’ll do so again. He doesn’t seem to like the loose change guys. Go to 6:48

    That guy is begging to get hit.
     
  22. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    The aluminum in that picture is at 1000C and in a very dark environment.


    There is no mention of what metal is in those bins, nor what temperature -and- it's also fairly dark.

    This is perhaps your best picture for your argument. However, it too has already been debunked here:
    **************************************
    Dr. Wood has claimed that the liquid metal flowing out of the 82nd floor of WTC-2 could be aluminum on the basis of her experiment, wherein a titanium ladle full of pure aluminum was heated until both the ladle and the liquid aluminum were orange hot. The aluminum, as it heated up, appeared to radiate with a less intense energy than the titanium, but the color was the same. As expected, the aluminum melted at 660 degrees Centigrade, and at that temperature the radiant spectrum and the emissivity of aluminum conspired to make the liquid aluminum appear silvery (no apparent glowing). As the temperature of the aluminum rose it began to glow with the same color as the ladle.

    The problem with concluding that the liquid flowing from the tower’s 82nd floor could have been aluminum on the basis of Dr. Wood’s experiment is that the liquid in the tower was not confined in a container so that more heat could be applied to raise the temperature of the liquid above its melting point. Instead, as soon as the metal liquefied it flowed away from the heat source under the force of gravity. Therefore, the color of the liquid flowing from the 82nd floor was at approximately the melting point of the metal. And therefore, it was molten iron from steel.

    Dr. Jones demonstrated by experiment that organic material floats on the liquid aluminum and burns up (oxidizes). Further, the liquid aluminum in this experiment was never heated to the point where it no longer appeared silvery. This experiment gave the expected result. Organic material would not change the color vs temperature behavior of aluminum.

    The conclusion of this analysis is inescapable. The liquid metal was molten iron.
    **************************************
    http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/MoltenWhat2.pdf


    Dark environment, unknown temperature, metal (not sure if it's aluminum, but perhaps) is in a ladle.


    Dark environment, unknown temperature, metal is in a ladle.


    I'd say it wasn't all that dark in only -one- of those photos and even then it was in a ladle.


    No, I wouldn't, although you may feel that way simply because the drops are surrounded by the grey tower.


    In what field, precisely, do you feel they would have to be in? Personally, I think that a physicist who can make discoveries on muon catalyzed fusion is more then a match for this, but by all means, attempt to prove me wrong.

    You may want to take a look at this:
    *********************************************
    Notable peer-reviewed publications (from over fifty):

    · J. Rafelski and S.E. Jones, "Cold Nuclear Fusion," Scientific American, 257: 84-89 (July 1987).

    · S.E. Jones, "Muon-Catalysed Fusion Revisited," (Invited article) Nature 321: 127-133 (1986).

    # S.E. Jones, et al. "Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction", Open Civil Engineering Journal, April 2008.

    # K. Ryan, J. Gourley and S.E. Jones, "Environmental Anomalies at the World Trade Center: Evidence for Energetic Materials", Environmentalist, August 2008.
    *********************************************
    http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/


    It's true that there is no evidence that the -plane- induced fires could have reached those temperatures. However, if one accounts for the iron rich spherules collected from Janette Mackinlay's apartment, one must conclude that -something- must have liquified the iron. The USGS survey of the WTC dust and the R. J. Lee study also noted the presence of metallic spheres in the WTC dust, even iron-rich spherules.

    In only one of the above studies, however, was the dust tested for a thermite fingerprint; Steven Jones'. It is -this- sample that gives the clearest indication as to -what- heated the metal so much.


    Thinking about it, I will concede that one.


    Clearly, some did (or nothing would have fallen out of the building). The surrounding metal may have been softened, but that's something else...


    I remember that even the alternate theory source wasn't sure that bowing didn't occur. However, molten iron also fell out of the window before the collapse, possibly due to a thermite reaction. So perhaps there was bowing, but not from the plane induced fires, but from thermite.


    My explanation could be the solution.


    I examined the evidence for a missile hitting the pentagon and dismissed it. I also considered the evidence for mini nukes on the WTC towers, but have yet to find anything solid. I have never claimed that 'death rays' were used.


    Even if this is so, it doesn't mean that the metal had to spew out of the windows; it could have stayed within the building.
     
  23. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    Can you give me an example of one of these 'cherry picked comments'?

    You may have noticed that I've researched quite a bit concerning the WTC buildings, but this view is not mine alone. I believe the following story makes it clear how dangerous the notion is to the official story that the plane induced fires had nothing to do with the collapse of the twin towers is:
    ***************************************
    SOUTH BEND -- The laboratory director from a South Bend firm has been fired for attempting to cast doubt on the federal investigation into what caused the World Trade Center's twin towers to collapse on Sept. 11, 2001....

    Ryan wrote that the institute's preliminary reports suggest the WTC's supports were probably exposed to fires no hotter than 500 degrees -- only half the 1,100-degree temperature needed to forge steel, Ryan said. That's also much cooler, he wrote, than the 3,000 degrees needed to melt bare steel with no fire-proofing.

    "This story just does not add up," Ryan wrote in his e-mail to Frank Gayle, deputy chief of the institute's metallurgy division, who is playing a prominent role in the agency investigation. "If steel from those buildings did soften or melt, I'm sure we can all agree that this was certainly not due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires in those towers."
    ***************************************
    http://www.wanttoknow.info/911kevinrryanfired
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page