Recommended Posts

Here's my response:

First off it's great he's looking at the fireside but one thing every seems to forget are the damn planes! Yeah planes hit the buildings, really big planes moving really fast. The planes didn't just land on the roof and deliver the fire they crashed into the frickin building. How do you even make a page describing how the towers couldn't have fallen and leave out the freaking planes?

And they were aircaft certified buildings and that means something now? So if I get into a frontal impact wreck in my car I'm guaranteed to live then right? Certifications mean nothing. Granted I'm sure that the spec does help somewhat they did stay up pretty long considering they were hit by huge damn planes, and I'm sure under normal use the certification might actually mean something, like say a small comuter plane, or accidental collision where a pilot actually tries to avoid it not hit fly through it.

Anyways I say he's a moron as well.

Further never believe anyone who tries to lure you in with the first few lines like: "I tried to believe", or "I tried to be patriotic". Whatever dude I don't fall for lame 3rd grade writing tricks.

Wisdom.

1. i believe this

2. the whole disaster was faked (and i dont want to hear it about the families and blah blah blah)

3. this is real, factual evidence.

4. a steel building has NEVER been destroyed by fire

5. if the building would have fallen, the top part would have most likely just toppled off, NOT take the whole building w/ it anyway

6. buildings were designed to withstand an impact from a bigger plane than those that hit it

7. i could go on and on.

1. i believe this

2. the whole disaster was faked (and i dont want to hear it about the families and blah blah blah)

3. this is real, factual evidence.

4. a steel building has NEVER been destroyed by fire

5. if the building would have fallen, the top part would have most likely just toppled off, NOT take the whole building w/ it anyway

6. buildings were designed to withstand an impact from a bigger plane than those that hit it

7. i could go on and on.

They did withstand it, it's just there were several structural flaws which cause it to collapse, such as the floor supports using bad fire protection and they just snapped when heated up by the large, hot fire which was fueled by the paper. And yes, it did go out because paper is not an adequate fuel for a fire.

This is what ****es me off, firstly people need to be educated.

The tabloid isnt education, the TV isnt education, your government isnt education.

Before you go bashing religions "Muslims = Terrorists" please learn something about the religion, learn what real muslims think about these people. Its like saying yeah catholics are rapists, or catholics molest children. Because you know that does NOT go down and you know its bull ****.

In this articles case you can judge the book by its cover because reading Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics! gave me the conclusion this guy is a uneducated prick who got a hardon while studying high school physics (or it was his teachers idea about this article) used google to get his facts and figures, used what he saw, read, ate from the biased media/ his friends and wrote an article.

Quickly skimming the article i can see he uses funny comments, "Hand me that remote, will you? I believe <clonk>. I believe <clonk>. I believe ... " ok so he would think this a funny topic now? He can joke about these things? death is funny to him right?

I blame the biased media and the government for generating people like him, especially the governments of these developed countries, one sided money hungry lying pricks. Who have no symphathy for the loss of human life. On one hand the world heath organisation is trying to eradicate diseases for a better future for our children and on the other hand thse pricks are destroying the children. So i say **** these narrow minded pricks.

Did you guys know that there were explosions that happened a couple of seconds right b4 the towers collapsed, there are reports of people hearing it and even a video clip from far away that even shakes while the explosion happened. And also, there is even a recording of fire fighters talking about getting above the tower floors, and saying the flames were safe enough to go through, proving that there might have not been an inferno?

The only reason why lots of people think that it collapsed the way it did, by the so called inferno, is cuz that was the only explanation told on the news and it was told over and over and they even brought in so called experts to make it even more believable, and why were they so quick to call it an attack when it could've been an accident.

Edit: Here are better links to evidence it was probably not planned by terrorists. Maybe it was but maybe they were aided by the government.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_fire.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/booker_time.html

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/schoolvideo.html

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/cutter.html

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/quickindex/

Edited by duhk
Did you guys know that there were explosions that happened a couple of seconds right b4 the towers collapsed, there are reports of people hearing it and even a video clip from far away that even shakes while the explosion happened. And also, there is even a recording of fire fighters talking about getting above the tower floors, and saying the flames were safe enough to go through, proving that there might have not been an inferno?

The only reason why lots of people think that it collapsed the way it did, by the so called inferno, is cuz that was the only explanation told on the news and it was told over and over and they even brought in so called experts to make it even more believable, and why were they so quick to call it an attack when it could've been an accident.

Edit: Here are better links to evidence it was probably not planned by terrorists. Maybe it was but maybe they were aided by the government.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_fire.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/booker_time.html

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/schoolvideo.html

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/cutter.html

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/quickindex/

the explostions could of happend nautrlly, the support beams crack, a few floors instide the building fall inside eachother first, and them down comes the rest of the building, wheres my proof? when they detonate a building, the floors colapse first (the interior of the building) and then the out side, and very heavy floors could easly make an explostion "like" sound

I do belive the wtc might of been staged, just not 100% sure

i forgot to put a link to the video.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtcshake.mpg

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/shake2.html

And what are you talking about the explosions could've happened natrually? Just keep this in mind, an explosion happening from far away, you can see it happen, but you won't hear or feel it happen until a couple of long seconds later. So there is no way you can feel the vibration from an explosion and hear it b4 you even see it happen, unless you're really really close.

So if it was the tower collapsing that was making the vibrations, then you should feel the vibrations after the building has collapsed and from what you said, the vibrations/explosion could have happened from the floors pancaking on top of each other. But that is wrong, cuz if it was cuz of the pancaking thingy, then the camera should be shaking after you see the building start to collapse, not WAY b4.

EDIT:

Oh, i get what you mean by it happening naturally. So you say the explosions that people were hearing are the cracking and snaping of the beams and stuff. But an explosion and something cracking and snaping sounds totally different, even if it was a big object snapping or cracking, it doesn't sound like an explosion. Even a building collapsing doesn't sound like an explosion. You need to work on your common sense.

Edited by duhk
6. buildings were designed to withstand an impact from a bigger plane than those that hit it

Yeah and the titanic was designed to be unsinkable. In fact that was a conspiracy too; it had nothing to do with icebergs, it was Kate Winslets huge fat arse that caused it to go down.

Edited by AJAJ
i forgot to put a link to the video.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtcshake.mpg

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/shake2.html

And what are you talking about the explosions could've happened natrually? Just keep this in mind, an explosion happening from far away, you can see it happen, but you won't hear or feel it happen until a couple of long seconds later. So there is no way you can feel the vibration from an explosion and hear it b4 you even see it happen, unless you're really really close.

So if it was the tower collapsing that was making the vibrations, then you should feel the vibrations after the building has collapsed and from what you said, the vibrations/explosion could have happened from the floors pancaking on top of each other. But that is wrong, cuz if it was cuz of the pancaking thingy, then the camera should be shaking after you see the building start to collapse, not WAY b4.

EDIT:

Oh, i get what you mean by it happening naturally. So you say the explosions that people were hearing are the cracking and snaping of the beams and stuff. But an explosion and something cracking and snaping sounds totally different, even if it was a big object snapping or cracking, it doesn't sound like an explosion. Even a building collapsing doesn't sound like an explosion. You need to work on your common sense.

Excuse me, have you ever been near a building when it collapsed? Do you know what the sound of a collapsing building sounds like, other than the ones you've seen in movies? No?

You folks now fighting over sounds, huh? Let me tell you something: Stuff you see breaking/exploding/shooting in the movies sounds totally DIFFERENT in real life, and not as overly loud as in movies either!

(Nothing was funnier than the disappointed face of a friend, when I demoed a pistol on the shooting range, he expected the movie like BANG, but got to hear the sound of a cheap firecracker)

Excuse me, have you ever been near a building when it collapsed? Do you know what the sound of a collapsing building sounds like, other than the ones you've seen in movies? No?

You must be a very dumb person or something. What's the reason for you to even ask that? It shows no relevance with any fact i've stated.

There's something called the TLC channel. And yah, i've heard gunshots in real life, and i've even heard real-life explosions. And gunshots sound more like ballons popping.

You're quick to assume that i've only witnessed it in movies, such ignorance. Maybe you're the one that needs to experience these real life things.

Oh yah, buildings in movies never collapse, they always explode, where's the action in something just collapsing?

Eh, don't worry about it. The point is they were destroyed. We must now go after those who destroyed them.

Well, the so-called people/terrorists that destroyed the buildings, they're dead... But if you're talking about who planned it, yeah you're right, but no one knows exactly who. But what would you do if it was the government that planned it. And did you even know it's possible israel did it, and for some reason our government seems to be protecting israel. Iraq isn't the ones with weapons of mass destruction, it's israel. And the US government made some sort of agreement to protect israel from weapons inspectors inspecting them.

Edit: oh amarok, uhm and even if i never did hear the sound of a collapsing building b4, i would be able to by watching that video. Oh yah, and notice how you can hear the sound of the collapse only a few seconds later after seeing it happen, i hope you're not stupid enough to mistaken the people yelling "OH NOOOOOO" with the sound of the collapse. Also notice how there's no vibration.

Edited by duhk
Well, the so-called people/terrorists that destroyed the buildings, they're dead... But if you're talking about who planned it, yeah you're right, but no one knows exactly who. But what would you do if it was the government that planned it. And did you even know it's possible israel did it, and for some reason our government seems to be protecting israel. Iraq isn't the ones with weapons of mass destruction, it's israel. And the US government made some sort of agreement to protect israel from weapons inspectors inspecting them.

Bush could have done it you know... its a damn good reason to start a "war on terrorism". And its even a greater reason to go and invade Afghanistan and Iraq to get oil. Iran is probably going to be next if Bush isnt going to be stopped.

Dont go accusing countries that you dont know jack about, you probably dont even know what really happaned on 9/11.

The US has more weapons of mass destruction than all the countries in the world combined yet it doesnt need them. What country is going to try to invade/attack the US? Hell, the only countries by the US are Canada and Mexico and you can be sure as hell they wont even try. And trust me, even if Osama did control the attack of 9/11, do you think the US would use some nuclear bomb just to kill him? But still, after having so much WMDs the UN never sends inspectors there...

Now, you talk about Israel having WMDs? Do you know how many enemy countries are around Israel? Probably not. Do you know how many times the Arabs tried to invade Israel? Probably not. So yeah, we have WMDs but we actually need them.

Wheres that agreement? Source?...

And where did you get the idea that Israel might have done? Or did you just make it up?

And trust me, even if Osama did control the attack of 9/11, do you think the US would use some nuclear bomb just to kill him? But still, after having so much WMDs the UN never sends inspectors there...

That's why we don't need weapons inspectors here because we wont use them and everyone knows that.

Do you know how many times the Arabs tried to invade Israel? Probably not. So yeah, we have WMDs but we actually need them.

isnt it israel who has invaded Palestinian land?? now becuase they cant get anymore, isreal has resolved to using extreme force by destroying thousands and thousands of homes and driving inoocent families out just to take the land.

how can this be justified..!!!?? :no:

Isreal has the second largest military power in the world.. if isreal gave all the land back that it has "forcely" invaded over the years then no arab country would have a grudge against them.

As you know Osama's main concern is getting israel out of palestinian land. ;)

if all the arab countries were to attack israel, less than half of the miliatry power israel has would only need to be used by them, since they have soo much..!! :o

Palestine doesnt even decent military power, as you see on the news..its chidren and men who fight againest tanks and guns with "STONES".

anyway..i dont want to turn this thread into a israel/palestinian conflict.. :)

Mind anyone explain this to me, why is the thread topic title is Area 51?

Obviously the thread started is asking for opinion on the WTC.

i dont see any relation unless you are trying to relate aliens helping the terrorist in master minding that incident. :blink:

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
    • For me, the fundamental problems with these "smartglasses" is that they really don't work well for people with significant prescriptions and massively up the price if you use attached lenses if they have displays, and if they don't, then they're not actually "smart" anything, rather just connecting to your phone and relaying voice to an AI. In a few cases like this, they throw in small cameras to feed video to the AI. All around, these feel like both a solution looking for a problem, and the problems it tries to solve seem more easily solved by different approaches and designs. Oddly, if the rumours are true, Apple may actually have invented something for once and it kind of does this right: put cameras in ear buds and manage the interface to AI exactly as most of us do: tapping on an ear bud and saying "Hey Google" or "Hey Siri." That makes them compatible with almost everyone, can double up as a hearing assist device, an impaired vision assist device, a "smart" device... and answer your phone and play music. That just seems like a better solution all around.
    • Usually the bigger ones with many fixes/changes take a few, theyre an exception to the rule most likely
    • If you don’t get lucky with Valve’s Steam Machine reservation system, you can make your own Steam Machine instead. Valve says that “starting with the SteamOS 3.8 release, you can put together your own Steam Machine using whatever PC parts you want.” SteamOS 3.8.10 launched last week with a slew of updates, including “improved compatibility with recent Intel and AMD platforms.” Alongside that improved compatibility, Valve is giving gamers the green light to install SteamOS on their own desktops. In an interview with The Verge, Valve’s Pierre-Loup Griffais said Valve has been “rolling out improvements to [SteamOS] so it’s more compatible with desktop hardware,” including eventual support for Nvidia graphics. Griffais says Valve has “a growing team” working on Nvidia driver support for SteamOS, adding, “We’re collaborating with Nvidia very closely.” While he mentioned that Nvidia support might not come this year, Griffais emphasized that “it’s certainly something that we’re working on in the background.”     Subscription not needed: https://archive.fo/Tssfc Subscription needed: https://www.theverge.com/games/953411/valve-steamos-desktop-nvidia
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      452
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!