Terrorists Suspend Laws of Physics!

[eth3l]

Uhm, I've done lots of research. Only thing i'm waiting to see is, any facts or evidence in your defenses. Everything you said, where are their sources? And don't be stupid and tell me that you can back it up, if you can then do it, no one is stopping you, unless you can't? I've said in posts b4 asking where are your sources, you still haven't any. So I have to assume you can't.

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

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

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

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

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

http://aztlan.net/fbishut.htm

http://whatreallyhappened.com/lavon.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/spyring.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/ramallah2.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/unfortunateaccidents.html

http://www.takebackthemedia.com/true911.html

http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html

There are all my sources... yeah, almost all of them are from one website, but it's a good one. And stop saying i don't read your posts, I read everything that needs to be read. But, you on the other hand, need to read my sources b4 making any claims about them being false, there are lots of hard facts there, so i suggest you read them.

Edit: here's more links.

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

The one below this sentence relates to the video footage of bush in the class, and of the guy who tells him something to his right ear as bush was reading with the class.

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

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

You are right, Osama is a good man, and we should not do everything possible to rid the world of him. we should do everything possible to expose the lies of the Bush administration, even if it means laatching onto lies ourselves.

In fact we should join the terrorists to destory Bush and make sure that he leaves power so we may weild our swords agaisnt the tyrant that is a free America!

DOWN WITH THE INFIDEL!

[BOOGMaster]

Actually, there were never any world trade centers. They never existed.

CMON PEOPLE!!!!!!!!! Holy cow...I can't believe all this garbage...

[Narlzac85]

This conspiracy theory is the dumbest thing I have read in a long time. The site posted on the first page is written by someone who only takes the heat into account. Fire did not "melt" the steel. Fire could weaken the steel. The main structure of the WTC towers was the outer wall, not the inner core. With major sections of the walls missing on the affected floors, the stress on the BOLTS used to support the floors (yes bolts not welds) was enough to crack them because they were poorly insulated and weakened by the heat. The floor then collapses onto the one below. The strength of each floor may have been very good, but we aren't just talking about weight. In physics, collisions show the moment of two object involving mass and velocity. The striking force of the floors above is not just the weight. The floors just below the impact may not have been as seriously weakened, but fuel does seep down and they would've been weakened enought to be destroyed in the impact of the upper floors. The effect just gets stronger as it continues. As for the large dust cloud; the trade centers floors were open and did not contain many concrete walls, only drywall seperation. Drywall easily creates more dust than anything I know of. Combined with the large amount of ash and the heat and pressure induced explosion of the conrete, the dust is easily posible without the use of explosives.

On the theory of government planned destruction. It makes no sense to destroy your own country to create a war, when we can just go in and do it whenever George W wants. Judging by his vocabulary and generally oblivious appearance, I find it hard to believe he has the intelligence and reason to commit to such a plan on a massive level. The complications involved and the stupidity of thinking someone would destroy part of the Pentagon, center of the armed forces, in order to start war ( using the pentagon as a center of operation) is utter ludicrousy

On the Isreal/Palestine problem. Is there really any reason for people to be fighting over such as small piece of land other than "ancestral claim" (which I find is more like religious zealotry). There are better things to worry about in life. Get political leaders that can make decisions instead of fundamentalists that only believe in divine will.

The UN should make the area surrounding Jerusalem into a free region, controlled by nobody. And about the agreements after WW1/2 creating the modern middle eastern map. This should've been left up to the people of the area to decide. Mistakes were made in the dividing lines that will bring bad consequences for decades to follow. Mixing different people together that never wanted to live together does not bode well for success. The map needs to be redone, but sadly I feel it may never happen unless there is another world war (as long as it doesn't kill everyone, which I don't think it would)

So here's to a ****ty future for the time being. Maybe we'll get it right next time

remember: kill terrorism, not ethnic groups. no racial/religious group is responsible, only extremists

[duhk]

How is it dumb? In what way is it dumb? There is evidence, pictures, videos, quoted lies told by united states president. What is there to hide if the President or anybody of the government didn't do it? There is a clear sign that there is a cover up.

Why doesn't it make sense to destroy your own country to create a war? Plus Bush is a dumbass, nothing he does makes sense. Can you not comprehend such a sceniorio cuz you believe that our country is better than this? And please, I really want you to find facts to falsify the claims, cuz I wish to not believe such a scenario can be true as well. After you find facts, please present it and share with us.

Don't forget the torture or humiliation of the prisoners. Remember when the war just had started, remember how america pointed fingers at terrorists or arabs, and said "oh look, they've broken the geneva convention laws". But then we do the same to them, but even worst? All they did was show their faces on tv and made them tell their names and information, but guess what... weren't we doing the same thing at the same time, but we did it with more arabs and more prisoners. It was only after we pointed the fingers to taddle on them that the american soldiers started to put bags over the heads of the prisoners, and try to make it look like " oh yeah, they're doing the wrong thing, we're doing the right thing, looky we have baggies over their heads now.

All that have responded only came in defense of what they believe with stuff like, oh it's not possible, oh it's not reasonable, oh we're better than that, oh this is just stupid, oh that guy is just stupid, but you know what? WHERE ARE YOUR SOURCES, FACTS, AND EVIDENCE TO BACKUP YOUR CLAIMS. No one here has presented any sources to their claims except for me, I wonder why... I have sources to my claims, why don't you? Even tho it's mostly from the same website. So, if you really did read the web links, you'll notice that the website also contain sources to their information. So don't say the website has no credablity if you haven't even read anything on the site.

Yeah, it's possible that the planes were the ones that made the buildings fall, but take note, the first building that fell down, was the least damaged one, with less fire. Most of the fuel of the plane spewed out of the corner of the building where it had hit. Oh the fuel could've leaked down to other floors, but fuel does evaporate, and it does burn easily and fast, and since there was a crash, don't you think a lot of the fuel was sprayed in every direction making it so that it's not in one puddle where it could leak. I play with fire a lot, and i've noticed that if fuel is spread out or sprayed, it burns and evaporates quicker, and if it's in a puddle or something then it will burn slower.

Cmon already, someone backup their claims with some sources. My mind is open, but it seems to me the rest isn't true for most of you in this thread. I'm ready to falsify my own claims, but i have nothing to do that with. So please, give me your sources.

[_I am Reptar]

those terrorist were really smart,scares me sometimes

[eth3l]

This conspiracy theory is the dumbest thing I have read in a long time. The site posted on the first page is written by someone who only takes the heat into account. Fire did not "melt" the steel. Fire could weaken the steel. The main structure of the WTC towers was the outer wall, not the inner core. With major sections of the walls missing on the affected floors, the stress on the BOLTS used to support the floors (yes bolts not welds) was enough to crack them because they were poorly insulated and weakened by the heat. The floor then collapses onto the one below. The strength of each floor may have been very good, but we aren't just talking about weight. In physics, collisions show the moment of two object involving mass and velocity. The striking force of the floors above is not just the weight. The floors just below the impact may not have been as seriously weakened, but fuel does seep down and they would've been weakened enought to be destroyed in the impact of the upper floors. The effect just gets stronger as it continues. As for the large dust cloud; the trade centers floors were open and did not contain many concrete walls, only drywall seperation. Drywall easily creates more dust than anything I know of. Combined with the large amount of ash and the heat and pressure induced explosion of the conrete, the dust is easily posible without the use of explosives.

On the theory of government planned destruction. It makes no sense to destroy your own country to create a war, when we can just go in and do it whenever George W wants. Judging by his vocabulary and generally oblivious appearance, I find it hard to believe he has the intelligence and reason to commit to such a plan on a massive level. The complications involved and the stupidity of thinking someone would destroy part of the Pentagon, center of the armed forces, in order to start war ( using the pentagon as a center of operation) is utter ludicrousy

On the Isreal/Palestine problem. Is there really any reason for people to be fighting over such as small piece of land other than "ancestral claim" (which I find is more like religious zealotry). There are better things to worry about in life. Get political leaders that can make decisions instead of fundamentalists that only believe in divine will.

The UN should make the area surrounding Jerusalem into a free region, controlled by nobody. And about the agreements after WW1/2 creating the modern middle eastern map. This should've been left up to the people of the area to decide. Mistakes were made in the dividing lines that will bring bad consequences for decades to follow. Mixing different people together that never wanted to live together does not bode well for success. The map needs to be redone, but sadly I feel it may never happen unless there is another world war (as long as it doesn't kill everyone, which I don't think it would)

So here's to a ****ty future for the time being. Maybe we'll get it right next time

remember: kill terrorism, not ethnic groups. no racial/religious group is responsible, only extremists

Wow, you have a lot to learn son.

[CrimsonBlur]

Uhm, I've done lots of research. Only thing i'm waiting to see is, any facts or evidence in your defenses. Everything you said, where are their sources? And don't be stupid and tell me that you can back it up, if you can then do it, no one is stopping you, unless you can't? I've said in posts b4 asking where are your sources, you still haven't any. So I have to assume you can't.

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

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

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

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

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

http://aztlan.net/fbishut.htm

http://whatreallyhappened.com/lavon.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/spyring.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/ramallah2.html

http://whatreallyhappened.com/unfortunateaccidents.html

http://www.takebackthemedia.com/true911.html

http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html

There are all my sources... yeah, almost all of them are from one website, but it's a good one. And stop saying i don't read your posts, I read everything that needs to be read. But, you on the other hand, need to read my sources b4 making any claims about them being false, there are lots of hard facts there, so i suggest you read them.

Edit: here's more links.

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

The one below this sentence relates to the video footage of bush in the class, and of the guy who tells him something to his right ear as bush was reading with the class.

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

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

Oh wow, SO MANY SOURCES. You do realize that with all of those links, you have THREE seperate sources, THREE. Three Web sites you think are telling you the "truth" about what happened. Are you frickin' kidding me? That's like a US citizen telling someone they get all of their news from "The Daily Show with John Stewart", which is satire (using real news). If you can't tell from that, what I'm saying is that your sources are a joke. NO ONE has confirmed anything from these sources except people that are obviously not qualified to do so. If this "conspiracy" were true, don't you think that maybe the ahhh... TERRORISTS would be saying this? Don't you think Osama and his gang would be sending out tapes to Muslim news organizations stating that the were somehow involved with Bush? If any of this was true, they wouldn't need him anymore. They want to throw the US into catastrophy and panic and kill all of the infidels, obviously this would be a good way to do it. But guess what, that hasn't happen, and it never will, because it is not true, period.

The reason the people arguing against you aren't citing any sources is because it would be IMPOSSIBLE to cite all of our sources. It's pointless. You know what our sources are: try every news organization and every government entity on earth. They ALL comply that it was a terrorist attack and that our own government had nothing to do with it. Some weirdo Web site, or a couple, can say whatever the hell they want, but the fact is that they are wrong. Good God, do you believe everything you see on the Internet? Obviously not, because you don't seem to believe 99.99999% of all of the facts and opinions of all of the other news organizations in the entire world (which you silly "whatreallyhappened.com" site is NOT a part of. Aparently you only believe what you think ties in with your twisted beliefs. I'm not saying you are twisted or that all of your beliefs are twisted. Look, I'm not saying you are a bad person for what you think of this, all I am saying is that you are wrong. The reason I can say you are wrong is because, in reality, all of the facts point straight to the fact that this was a terrorist attack planned by Al Qeda and involved ONLY THEM, no one else (including the fact there is no evidence to support the early claims that Saddam may have been involved). If you can give us on, just ONE legitamate source, and not some stupid Web site that obviously has their own agenda, that would be GREAT, otherwise, come back down to Earth.

[allen2404]

"Neither had the impacts significantly weakened the structural integrity of the buildings. Even under normal circumstances these flexible buildings swayed so much in high winds that seasickness was a noticeable problem among workers on upper floors. Even on floors near the impact sites, many had felt only a mild shudder as the aircraft struck. "

-From one of those wack-job websites

I can't stand people that think everything is a conspiracy, simply for the sake of thinking that.

The whole seasickness bit, is a bold-faced LIE. The designers of the WTC specifically set up free eye-testing centers, which were actually movement simulators, in order to gauge people's true reactions to wind-swaying. They put these simulators under some pretty extreme simulations, with 100 MPH winds, and people didn't even notice it. You're telling me that seasickness was a regular occurence, when extreme tests yielded no complaints, BULLSH*T.

I'm not even going to address the false boiling point of jet fuel given at these sites. (It's actually 275 C). With such blatant falacies like these, why is this even an issue?

Muslim-Terrorist-Apologists, stop this sh*t already. We all know who did it, and no nitpicking is going to avoid the fact that you beloved "Religion of Peace" bretheren murdered 2000 Americans on that day.

Allen, From Brooklyn, NY. Watched the towers fall that day.

[oldaccount1]

interesting article.

[BOOGMaster]

Unbelieveable. MUSLIM TERRORISTS CRASHED PLANES INTO THE WORLD TRADE CENTER AND BLEW IT UP.

simply amazing how far people will go...

[duhk]

Simply amazing how closed minded people are.

[BOOGMaster]

Simply amazing how closed minded people are.

uh - ok... :no: :no: :no:

[duhk]

Oh wow, SO MANY SOURCES. You do realize that with all of those links, you have THREE seperate sources, THREE. Three Web sites you think are telling you the "truth" about what happened. Are you frickin' kidding me? That's like a US citizen telling someone they get all of their news from "The Daily Show with John Stewart", which is satire (using real news). If you can't tell from that, what I'm saying is that your sources are a joke. NO ONE has confirmed anything from these sources except people that are obviously not qualified to do so. If this "conspiracy" were true, don't you think that maybe the ahhh... TERRORISTS would be saying this? Don't you think Osama and his gang would be sending out tapes to Muslim news organizations stating that the were somehow involved with Bush? If any of this was true, they wouldn't need him anymore. They want to throw the US into catastrophy and panic and kill all of the infidels, obviously this would be a good way to do it. But guess what, that hasn't happen, and it never will, because it is not true, period.

The reason the people arguing against you aren't citing any sources is because it would be IMPOSSIBLE to cite all of our sources. It's pointless. You know what our sources are: try every news organization and every government entity on earth. They ALL comply that it was a terrorist attack and that our own government had nothing to do with it. Some weirdo Web site, or a couple, can say whatever the hell they want, but the fact is that they are wrong. Good God, do you believe everything you see on the Internet? Obviously not, because you don't seem to believe 99.99999% of all of the facts and opinions of all of the other news organizations in the entire world (which you silly "whatreallyhappened.com" site is NOT a part of. Aparently you only believe what you think ties in with your twisted beliefs. I'm not saying you are twisted or that all of your beliefs are twisted. Look, I'm not saying you are a bad person for what you think of this, all I am saying is that you are wrong. The reason I can say you are wrong is because, in reality, all of the facts point straight to the fact that this was a terrorist attack planned by Al Qeda and involved ONLY THEM, no one else (including the fact there is no evidence to support the early claims that Saddam may have been involved). If you can give us on, just ONE legitamate source, and not some stupid Web site that obviously has their own agenda, that would be GREAT, otherwise, come back down to Earth.

Hey, dumbass, the site also has IT'S SOURCES, so my SOURCES has IT'S SOURCES, i suggest you get perscription glasses and take a harder look.

And you are dumb to think that the media controls the media, well you're wrong, cuz the goverment or people like the fbi or cia controls it. If there is anything incriminating against the government, they will try to surpress it cuz they don't want the people to know and do something about it. And it will get supressed cuz they have the power, and the force to do so. All the history that we learn, it's just all about how great america is, but all the bad things are left out, like how america lost a war to canada.

And yah, osama could do all those things, but maybe osama still works for our government. You know bush has good ties to osamas family. If you don't know that, then you're a dumbass. So if osama works for the government still, then maybe he's just out on the loose just as an excuse, a fake target, just to make a reason for american people to hate the middle eastern country. Didn't you hear all the reports about how bin laden has been spoted, and they could capture him but they won't for some reason? Maybe they donm't want to. Maybe that's part of the plan, who knows, until it's too late.

Hey, at least i'm looking for the truth. Yes i have my doubts, but the facts that i get the pictures i see, the videos i see, they make me think otherwise. Stop making excuses to why you can't prove me wrong, if i'm wrong, there is definately something out there that can prove me wrong, but you guys can't seem to find it, cuz maybe it's true, maybe i'm right. And you think i believe everything i see on the internet, well you're wrong. Hey i know a lot of the things are not true on the internet, but check this out, you believe everything the government tells you? well obviously, are you too dumb to realize that the government has a reputation for lying and covering things up?

I don't believe in just one scenario, i believe in alot of scenarios that could've happened, even what was told on tv, but i'm not sticking to only one story, cuz the one told on tv is bull****. It's obvious there is a coverup, but you closed minded people are too dumb to notice, and believe anything they see. well i gtg, can't finish. tired. of dumbasses. peace out.

[BOOGMaster]

I wasn't attacking you. Sorry if you felt that way. I am aiming it at your opinion.

Your view, IMHO, is dead wrong. Your above post, IMO, is dead wrong.

That is my opinion.

Don't take it personally. There is no need for vulgarity. It just goes...well...forget it...

[insurektion]

That guy is stupid, his main argument is that steel doesnt melt,

Guy's a moron, site's stupid bs

You are a moron. :rolleyes:

He said the temperature at which Steel melted. And concluded that the jet fuel could not possibly have burned that hot. Then discussed how the building fell into itself damaging nothing around it (staying within its footprint). I don't know what to think about it as I have only Grade 12 physics but it is a really interesting read.

Jeeze how can you have something go so far over your head is beyond me.

[insurektion]

The government has plenty of control over media networks. It's so obvious if you look at the news (mainly CNN) and are not American. When i went to Florida (March 2004) (from Ontario) I couldnt believe how ridicules the news was. CNN was showing nothing but Terror this teroor that. Islam attacks this, Muslim extremest, etc etc. I was like 'Where the news THis is BS'.

[duhk]

I wasn't attacking you. Sorry if you felt that way. I am aiming it at your opinion.

Your view, IMHO, is dead wrong. Your above post, IMO, is dead wrong.

That is my opinion.

Don't take it personally. There is no need for vulgarity. It just goes...well...forget it...

Then prove me wrong, i want to get proved wrong. I'll admit that i'm wrong if someone proves me wrong, but no one has. Like i said b4, all the people who don't agree with me, just say, oh that's stupid, oh that's not sensable, oh, he's just a kid, lets call him names, oh but like the news didn't show this stuff so it couldn't be true, oh well shutup and prove me wrong already.

[BOOGMaster]

Read the last post by CrimsonBlur....

[duhk]

Did you read my last post or is it the second last?

[clide]

How the World Trade Center collapsed.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/wtc7.htm

I am going to have to agree with some of the other people here, thinking that the government was in charge of all this is just pure crazy.

That page is filled with half truths and broken logic.

First, half that page is about how the temperature wasn't hot enough to melt steel. It doesn't have to melt to weaken, it is common knowledge that heat decreases the strength of steel, but incase you dont believe me. http://www.piping-toolbox.com/40_346.html

Whether the fuel burned gradually at a temperature below the boiling point of jet fuel (360 C), or burned rapidly above the boiling point of jet fuel, in neither case would an office building full of spilled jet fuel sustain a fire at 815 degrees C (1500 F) long enough to melt 200,000 tons of steel.

Wow that is some broken logic. The fire had to melt all the steel in the building for it to collapse??? that is news to me.

And as others have mentioned, it doesn't even talk about the damage caused by the impact of the planes. A 395,000 pound object going 470 miles per hours and then exploding on impact is going to cause a lot of damage.

He also goes on rambling about things that don't really have an impact on anything. Like the concrete

"My experience with concrete has shown that it will crumble under stress, but rarely does it just give up the ghost and turn to powder."  "I am told by a friend that a man named Dr. Robert Schuller was on television telling about his trip to the ruins.  He announced in the interview that there was not a single block of concrete in that rubble.  From the original 425,000 cubic yards of concrete that went into the building, all was dust.  How did that happen?"

Oh so I should be persuaded by his experiences with concrete? Yeah I used concrete to hold a mailbox in place once, am I experienced? No concrete in the ruins huh. I get it now!!!! The government secretly removed all the concrete from the building and replaced it with fake concrete to make the building collapse with a big cloud of dust. Of course it is so simple!!!

He also never says what would have made it collapse if it wasn't the impact and fire. Do you know why? because nothing else would make sense.

[CrimsonBlur]

How the World Trade Center collapsed.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/wtc7.htm

I am going to have to agree with some of the other people here, thinking that the government was in charge of all this is just pure crazy.

That page is filled with half truths and broken logic.

First, half that page is about how the temperature wasn't hot enough to melt steel. It doesn't have to melt to weaken, it is common knowledge that heat decreases the strength of steel, but incase you dont believe me. http://www.piping-toolbox.com/40_346.html

Wow that is some broken logic. The fire had to melt all the steel in the building for it to collapse??? that is news to me.

And as others have mentioned, it doesn't even talk about the damage caused by the impact of the planes. A 395,000 pound object going 470 miles per hours and then exploding on impact is going to cause a lot of damage.

He also goes on rambling about things that don't really have an impact on anything. Like the concrete

Oh so I should be persuaded by his experiences with concrete? Yeah I used concrete to hold a mailbox in place once, am I experienced? No concrete in the ruins huh. I get it now!!!! The government secretly removed all the concrete from the building and replaced it with fake concrete to make the building collapse with a big cloud of dust. Of course it is so simple!!!

He also never says what would have made it collapse if it wasn't the impact and fire. Do you know why? because nothing else would make sense.

Finally! I didn't really feel like wasting my time researching the exact topics brought up in this, I didn't feel I needed to. But it's good that someone did, because this post alone pretty much debunks everything that has been presented as "evidence" pointing to any kind of conspiracy... at least in relation to the buildings not being able to collapse only from the plane impacts/explosions/feul leakage.

Look, if duhk and the others trying to defend their stance on this can't be at least somewhat convinced they are probably dead wrong with this evidence (among any other evidence they could easily find, since it is so abundant compaired to the "conspiracy theory" evidence), then they never will be, no matter how exhaustive the proof against their beliefs on this are. Not only is the evidence on the howstuffworks.com page more accurate and more trustworthy, there is more RELEVANT information there than all of the links provided by duhk combined, and that is just one example of the PROOF that the rest of us have been talking about. You could probably find hundres of such articles all with different or related sources saying the same thing (since I have seen similar stories on TV and in newspapers and magazines).

Now, what we would like to see is someone to come along with some credible sources that could possibly refute the facts and claims in just the howstuffworks.com article alone, and not just from some site that has non-experts (with no past history of any kind of legitimate or accurate article to mention) write COMMENTARIES on world matters by picking and choosing quotes and figures out of context, such as whatreallyhappened.com.

[edit] I would also like to add that if you do happen to read the entire article at howstuffworks.com, you'll notice they give quite a few links to other related articles/sources. [/edit]

Edited May 31, 2004 by CrimsonBlur

[duhk]

How the World Trade Center collapsed.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/wtc7.htm

I am going to have to agree with some of the other people here, thinking that the government was in charge of all this is just pure crazy.

That page is filled with half truths and broken logic.

First, half that page is about how the temperature wasn't hot enough to melt steel. It doesn't have to melt to weaken, it is common knowledge that heat decreases the strength of steel, but incase you dont believe me. http://www.piping-toolbox.com/40_346.html

Wow that is some broken logic. The fire had to melt all the steel in the building for it to collapse??? that is news to me.

And as others have mentioned, it doesn't even talk about the damage caused by the impact of the planes. A 395,000 pound object going 470 miles per hours and then exploding on impact is going to cause a lot of damage.

He also goes on rambling about things that don't really have an impact on anything. Like the concrete

Oh so I should be persuaded by his experiences with concrete? Yeah I used concrete to hold a mailbox in place once, am I experienced? No concrete in the ruins huh. I get it now!!!! The government secretly removed all the concrete from the building and replaced it with fake concrete to make the building collapse with a big cloud of dust. Of course it is so simple!!!

He also never says what would have made it collapse if it wasn't the impact and fire. Do you know why? because nothing else would make sense.

Well, i'll read that later, i'm tired from jogging yesterday.

But anyways, Clide. You brought more evidence that says the so called inferno's including the impact of the crash didn't make the building fall. You pointed out that all the concrete was turned to dust, if you have any logic of yourself or any common sense, you would think, hey an "EXPLOSION" is what made the concrete turn to dust. Yeah, it's impossible for government people to come in and remove all the concrete, but an EXPLOSION, is possible to have turned all the concrete into dust.

Oh yah, and since we're talking about the dust, that makes me even think more, where did all the dust come from? Do you remember the videos of the HUGE dust clouds that swept through the streets of new york, yeah well if you guys have any logic, you would think hey, that was too much dust, that can't come from a building that collapsed under it's wieght with the help of a small fire and a plan crash. How does a building collapse create so much dust? Unless something exploded inside of it to turn all the stuff in the building into dust.

Anyways, can someone find me a video of a building getting destroyed by a wrecking ball, to see if i'm correct.

And just shutup already crimsonblur, you're just another old drunk who knows nothing and believes anything you read or see in the news. Just remember, the government has the power and the force to change anything in the news if they see fit. You should look up on the incidences where news channels did stories relating to government stuff, and then it was posted on their webpage, but for some reason, it just disappears.

[clide]

If there were enough explosives planted in the building to turn all the concrete in the building to dust (assuming a collapsing building doesn't turn concrete to dust, which I haven't seen any evidence to prove that) Then don't you think that people in the building would have noticed explosive control wires/fuses running around the building? Or perhaps see someone planting them? They would have to plant them in nearly every concrete pillar on every floor. Or that the fire spredding throughout the building would detonate the explosives prematurely? Or perhaps you are referring to one large explosion? Well frankly an explosion large enough to do that would blow out the windows of all the buildings for a couple miles. As well as making a massive fireball and send parts of the building flying in all directions.

I personnally do not have much experience with concrete, but the forces involved in a collapsing building of that magnitude are tremendous. And I don't doubt for a second that they would be able to turn concrete to dust. Please point me to information that proves otherwise (not one of your conspiracy sites, they don't prove it) or why you have significant experience with the structural properties of concrete.

[Steven P. Administrators]

I also question how two of the largest buildings in the world managed to fall down on itself, especially when the North Tower supposedly was weakened on one corner, not all (like the South Tower which received a direct impact)

Its like many engineers have repeatedly said after the event "it looked more like a controlled demolition"

[CrimsonBlur]

And just shutup already crimsonblur, you're just another old drunk who knows nothing and believes anything you read or see in the news. Just remember, the government has the power and the force to change anything in the news if they see fit. You should look up on the incidences where news channels did stories relating to government stuff, and then it was posted on their webpage, but for some reason, it just disappears.

Another old drunk? Not only is that a completely out of line statement, you are also wrong. I am neither old NOR a drunk. I am 22 years old, and I very rarely drink. Actually, the last time I did drink I think I was posting my first post on this topic, and that was the first time I had touched alcohol in over a month.

I will NOT shut up just because you disagree with me, just like I wouldn't expect YOU to shut up just because I disagree with you on this topic. To say so is basically admitting to someone you cannot refute their arguement. You don't TELL the person to shut up, you MAKE them shut up by providing irrefutable evidence to back up your claims so they have nothing more to say. Either that, or the arguement becomes a standstill because neither side can EVER agree. Look, I would not be replying to you telling you I think you are wrong if you could put ANY credible evidence in my or anyone else's face regarding this issue, but all you have done is given us a bunch of links from some whaco Web site.

The fact that you have to resort to petty name-calling and [virtual] yelling throughout this "conversation" makes it obvious that you are at the very least immature. I could say what else it implies, but I'm not here to attack you personally, though you seem to be just fine attacking people personally and calling people stupid because they don't agree with you and don't believe a word that you type. The closest I WILL come to a personal attack is by telling you a little something I have learned over the years witnessing court cases (my father is a former attourney and now a judge) and just simply living life. People that resort to name-calling, yelling and unrelated references in a dispute of any kind are any combination of the following three things: 1) lying 2) incopetent 3) bias. In more simeple words (which you may require), in a debate such as this, these three things would be translated as so: 1) wrong (and maybe also lying) 2) no clue what they are talking about 3) have a pre-determined conclusion regardless of any and all evidence presented to them.

Now, all of that being said, I will concede that this issue will never be resolved in a forum on Neowin, no matter how much evidence either side has against the other. That much is obvious. I really wasn't going to say anything more, but I really had to make some kind of response after you called me "just another old drunk who knows nothing and believes anything you read or see in the news". That statement is not only false, it is offensive to me personally. And if you were any kind of intelligent, decent person, you would aplologize to me immediately after reading this post. After making statements like that, which you have repeatedly done throughout this topic in regards to a number of individuals, any credibility you may have had or obtained is completely thrown out the window. Good day. ;)