A secret like 911 wouldn't be able to be kept today. Especially when an administration is so hated. The information of something this large in scale would have had to get out by now. There is no documentation that I have seen that proves a conspiracy. All there is is lame videos and claims by so-called experts that have been debunked by other so-called experts.
until there is a formal investigation (and the wheels seem like they're turning) and your president agrees to testify under oath , I will continue to doubt the "official" story.
you and people like charger should email your heroes, Bush and Cheney and tell them it's time to put all this silliness to rest once and for all.
demand they testify in accordance with all the so called evidence..
I mean they are innocent on all counts so there really shouldn't be a problem, right?
There was one. Two if you count the 9/11 Comission and the NIST report.
You choose to believe in a conspiracy 'theory'. There could be 100 formal investigations and as long as they come out supporting the 'other theory' you will continue to believe your conspiracy 'theory'.
There was one. Two if you count the 9/11 Comission and the NIST report.
You choose to believe in a conspiracy 'theory'. There could be 100 formal investigations and as long as they come out supporting the 'other theory' you will continue to believe your conspiracy 'theory'.
Sad.
Nope. Something about it all just didn't look right to a lot of people. Now that we begin to take a closer look, to really think about it instead of just swallowing it, we slow things down, and a lot of the original ovservations come out.
What was tower #7 really? That thing just "getting pulled" like that is far from normal!
Alright, after searching for other videos it might not be fake just piss-poor video quality. I'm a man, i'll admit when I'm wrong, which is hard to do after the dumbass comment.
Who cares if the building was brought down on purpose? No lives were lost in that building. If you are using that as proof of demolition of the two towers then why didn't they fall the same way? Starting at the bottom instead of at point of impact. Please explain that to me professor!
I like your signature. Nice to see that not all Boston Red Sox fans have an inferiority complex when it comes to the Yankees. It is possible to root for your team, and not hate the other! If Manny can do it, then I think it is possible for the Yankee and Red Sox fans to do it too.
thanks and not to get off the point of this thread...how can they suck with 26 champions rings. I never got that and never will. I will never root for them however, I do have my limitations! I will always cheer on the team that they are playing, I think it is inbedded in me. But I love baseball and I have grown up watching the Sox. Still lots and lots of baseball to be played.
Alright, after searching for other videos it might not be fake just piss-poor video quality. I'm a man, i'll admit when I'm wrong, which is hard to do after the dumbass comment.
Who cares if the building was brought down on purpose? No lives were lost in that building.
None of the videos are doctored. They are taken from the the original television broadcasts, and looked at closely. Just like crime scene investigators do with evidence when they solve a crime. So why should the process for 9/11 be any different?
If you are using that as proof of demolition of the two towers then why didn't they fall the same way? Starting at the bottom instead of at point of impact. Please explain that to me professor!
Because they were too tall. They couldn't have been taken from the bottom down. They actually DISINTEGRATED - yeah fucking disintegrated! from the top down at the speed of gravity again no doubt. That in itself is insane.
They would have fell like trees and damaged a lot of other buildings, if taken from the bottom up, which would make the disposal i mean "clean up" or "cover up" harder.
Sigh...don't be a kid, see past the insults. I have a low tolerance for slow people. So what? I'm being honest.
What's hilarious is all the people that tell me it's all a crock of shit and completely unfounded. That's the real conspiracy.
mmmmm....I am probably older than you and no I will not see past the insults, who is really being the kid? Trying being a little more adult if you want to get your point/opinion/theory/conspiracy across is all that I am saying. It would be a more powerful discussion.
mmmmm....I am probably older than you and no I will not see past the insults, who is really being the kid? Trying being a little more adult if you want to get your point/opinion/theory/conspiracy across is all that I am saying. It would be a more powerful discussion.
What you over 40? hehe...it's all the same over 35. Yes please give me more lessons on being adult If that is your genuine intention other than to entertain some vague touché of some sort.
I do what I do for a reason, unbeknownst to the casual observer
There was one. Two if you count the 9/11 Comission and the NIST report.
not exactly, both of those reports are based on the "official" story.
For the record, I don't know what happened on 9/11. I find a lot of the conspiracy theories as hard to swallow as the official story. Frankly, the data is incomplete.
I have yet to hear from the two guys who are at the wheel of the country at the time. When they decide to testify I'll listen to their sworn testimony and consider making a more concrete stance.
what's really sad is how quickly fearful americans are to take the word of known liars
Charger wears NIST report undies to bed each night...right after he washes up with his NIST edition towel set, flicks off Fox news for the night, and snuggles in for 8 hours of sexy dancing sugarplum fairies dressed like Rambo in his dreams
I think it is most likely that members of the U.S. government were behind 9/11 to some degree. However, I have be skeptical of some 9/11 conspiracy theorists.
Take for example Brigham Young physics professor Steven Jones (no relation to Alex Jones). He claims he has proven that the WTC towers were taken down by a product used in controlled demolitions called Thermate (made primarily out of thermite).
Not knowing shit about physics myself, I can't exactly take his word for it. And since Professor Jones is also famous for a book about supposed evidence for Jesus having visited the Americas after he rose from the dead, a principal beliefs of Mormons, I have a reason NOT to take his word for it.
None of the videos are doctored. They are taken from the the original television broadcasts, and looked at closely. Just like crime scene investigators do with evidence when they solve a crime. So why should the process for 9/11 be any different?
Because they were too tall. They couldn't have been taken from the bottom down. They actually DISINTEGRATED - yeah fucking disintegrated! from the top down at the speed of gravity again no doubt. That in itself is insane.
They would have fell like trees and damaged a lot of other buildings, if taken from the bottom up, which would make the disposal i mean "clean up" or "cover up" harder.
Then what is your point with these videos? What are trying to prove?
Yes they did disintergrate, that's what happens when thousands of pounds of steel and concrete fall from a thousand feet in the air. It doesn't prove that charges were used.
the Architects!! they should be arrested and tried right away.
when the buildings went up they said they could withstand a hit from a 707...LIARS!!!
And the way they BOTH disenegrated from the top even though they were hit in the middle?! anyone who builds such shitty structures should be shot on site.
I also think it was a huge error to use demolition explosives as structure supports. they had to think that was gonna come back and bite em in the ass at some point.
I think we've all learned a valuable lesson in not cutting corners.
With the vast knowledge of engineering that I am sure you have, you must realise that the lower the strike, the more detremental.
this is do mainly to strain/stress an heat dterioization. if the planes had been low on fuel, they likely would have stood.
I am sure you realise that the tower design was even stronger than that of the empire state building, which withstood a B25....which was not carrying as much fuel
The only thing I enjoy is having no feelings....being numb rocks!
And I won't make the same mistakes
(Because I know)
Because I know how much time that wastes
(And function)
Function is the key
First off, the buildings did survive the impact of the planes. Also, they were 767s, a slightly bigger and heavier plane.
Secondly, if there were dust clouds rising from the street that would tell me that there were ground level explosions. Then why didn't they start falling at the bottom instead of at the point of impact. At least there would have been more of a lean at the top during collapse if support was cut at the bottom. I don't buy it.
applauds
sometimes, things are exactly as r=they seem....why do people want to make this more complex than it is?
The only thing I enjoy is having no feelings....being numb rocks!
And I won't make the same mistakes
(Because I know)
Because I know how much time that wastes
(And function)
Function is the key
better yet. Watch this news report with peter Jennings: start watching at 1 min 30 seconds. Right at 1 min 42 seconds you can the see the building exploding all the way as it goes down. Jesus! It's blowing up faster than it's actually falling. I mean come on now!!!
Just wanted to clearify a few points here about the 9/11 theories.
First of all there is a serious group of level-headed people that are looking at the facts. They tend to think that the buildings were brought down using Thermate as Prof. Jones had discovered. I did some reading up on the oxidization of steal, and looked at some of the photographs Jones presented. It does appear to be what he said. Additionally the same evidence was reported in the FEMA report in the appendices. They said "further investigation is needed" but haven't investigated it. Underwriter Laboratories that certified the steal, would have checked for any sulfurization, they claim the steal met specifications. The evidence Prof. Jones has uncovered implies explosives were used.
In controlled demolitions, self-implosions are done by severing the core columns at the basement level. To weaken the load-balancing infrastructure. The laws of inertia do not allow a buildings top 5 floors to pulverize the bottom 70 floors, without first removing it's main supports. Anyone who has done their research will recall a photo of a firefighter standing infront of a diagonally severed support colum, which molten metal hanging from it.
Historically when planes crash into buildings and the buildings burn, they do not collapse. When burning structures begin collapse, small portions break off. The air resistance is much less than the remaining structure so they tend to be deflected off.
There is irrefutable evidence to support this theory. The questions of who and why are much more open to opinion. The most prominent answer of who is the Bush administration. The why is attributed to control of regions, people or money.
Then you have the crowd that will believe any theory. That little spacepods were floating in the air and projecting a holographic image over the missiles to make them look like jets. Not entirely impossible, but not likely and there is no evidence to support it. I would imagine many of these people think Bush is a reptile. The JFK assassination is a typical conspiracy. Two investigations and trials stated there was a clear conpsiracy. Still the records of the assassination are locked in FBI files until 2039. In this particular case, great care was taken to destroy the evidence. Not much exists that isn't already known, save a confession.
If you have never met a crooked cop or a con man. Then you might think everyone in the government is 100% pure. Unfortunately that is not the case. Realistically speaking, not many of them are even 50% pure in the upper eschelon. Many people have spoken out about crooked conduct. It's happened time and time again. Yet, some people, refuse to believe them.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Just wanted to clearify a few points here about the 9/11 theories.
First of all there is a serious group of level-headed people that are looking at the facts. They tend to think that the buildings were brought down using Thermate as Prof. Jones had discovered. I did some reading up on the oxidization of steal, and looked at some of the photographs Jones presented. It does appear to be what he said. ... The evidence Prof. Jones has uncovered implies explosives were used.
Did you hear where Professor Jones got his 'Thermate' sample? I just watched him on C-Span.
Prof. Jones states that he got the tiny sample from a woman who scraped what she thought to be dirt off of a piece of supposed WTC steel that was to be part of a memorial somewhere. She kept the dirt in a bucket and it wasn't until she became aware of the Professor's research that she came forward.
Here's what his own colleagues had to say about his 'research'.
The BYU physics department has issued a statement:
"The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones's hypotheses and interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of World Trade Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and practitioners, including many of BYU's own faculty. Professor Jones' department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review."
The Fulton College of Engineering and Technology department has also added
"The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones."
But don't let this kinda stuff get in the way of your belief.
BYU Physics professor and founder of SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 TRUTH Steven E Jones presents his presentation on the collapse of WTC Buildings 1,2, and 7 on 9/11. A very informative and scientific presentation that raises serious questions about the official account of the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7
the Architects!! they should be arrested and tried right away.
when the buildings went up they said they could withstand a hit from a 707...LIARS!!!
And the way they BOTH disenegrated from the top even though they were hit in the middle?! anyone who builds such shitty structures should be shot on site.
I also think it was a huge error to use demolition explosives as structure supports. they had to think that was gonna come back and bite em in the ass at some point.
I think we've all learned a valuable lesson in not cutting corners.
Yeah, they assumed that a if a 707 was going to hit the towers, the plane would not be full of fuel.
I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
Here's what his own colleagues had to say about his 'research'.
The BYU physics department has issued a statement:
"The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones's hypotheses and interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of World Trade Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and practitioners, including many of BYU's own faculty. Professor Jones' department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review."
The Fulton College of Engineering and Technology department has also added
"The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones."
they are just protecting themselves. they don't want people to think they are "cooky", because the majority of people don't want to accept that idea.
you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
~Ron Burgundy
And I'm not living this life without you, I'm selfish and clear
And you're not leaving here without me, I don't wanna be without
My best... friend. Wake up, to see you could have it all
Prof. Jones states that he got the tiny sample from a woman who scraped what she thought to be dirt off of a piece of supposed WTC steel that was to be part of a memorial somewhere. She kept the dirt in a bucket and it wasn't until she became aware of the Professor's research that she came forward.
Here's what his own colleagues had to say about his 'research'.
The BYU physics department has issued a statement:
"The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones's hypotheses and interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of World Trade Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and practitioners, including many of BYU's own faculty. Professor Jones' department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review."
The Fulton College of Engineering and Technology department has also added
"The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones."
But don't let this kinda stuff get in the way of your belief.
It sure wouldn't be the first time a scientist has done some crazy stuff and been seen as a nut job. The stereotypical scientist portrayed in movies is usually a bit nuts. Why do you think that is? Do you think people thought that Einstein was all upstairs? Well of course he wasn't.
Prof. Jones at least is coherent and takes his time looking at stuff. How do you know his other work isn't correct?
I mean come on. There is no way a huge kerosene fireball made it down the elevator shaft 80 floors and exploded with enough force to knock marble panels off the walls. When you see the jet fuel explode outside of the building it last a mere second. How do you suppose this fireball lasted long enough to make it to the lobby? Avoiding elevators and with very little oxygen. If you believe that, I don't know, you should upgrade your schools.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I mean come on. There is no way a huge kerosene fireball made it down the elevator shaft 80 floors and exploded with enough force to knock marble panels off the walls.
How did you come to this conclusion? What experience did you draw on? What kinds of research was done to disprove this?
How did you come to this conclusion? What experience did you draw on? What kinds of research was done to disprove this?
Umm, experience, if you turn on your lighter. Does the flame extend for 1000 feet? No! Because it's not possible. Do you know how much fuel would be required to make this happen? In both buildings? I mean give me a break. The odds of this happening the way stated by NIST is 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 at least. Further more, they admit they can't explain the sulfur in the molten metal. They just pick the first conclusion that enters there minds. They were intent on giving people an answer, not necissarily the right one. They performed model tests and all their tests failed. They had to make a computer simulation and after changing some of the metrics finally got it to happen like it did. They had to use false information. That's not science, that's a cover-up.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Umm, experience, if you turn on your lighter. Does the flame extend for 1000 feet? No! Because it's not possible. Do you know how much fuel would be required to make this happen? In both buildings? I mean give me a break. The odds of this happening the way stated by NIST is 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 at least.
I see. So you have no proof and only your experince with a cigarette lighter to come to the conlusion that the NIST report is wrong.
Can you show how you arrived at the odds of "1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 at least."?
Don't feel bad about your lack of actual scientific proof. Prof Jones hasn't done much better than yourself.
Comments
until there is a formal investigation (and the wheels seem like they're turning) and your president agrees to testify under oath , I will continue to doubt the "official" story.
you and people like charger should email your heroes, Bush and Cheney and tell them it's time to put all this silliness to rest once and for all.
demand they testify in accordance with all the so called evidence..
I mean they are innocent on all counts so there really shouldn't be a problem, right?
There was one. Two if you count the 9/11 Comission and the NIST report.
You choose to believe in a conspiracy 'theory'. There could be 100 formal investigations and as long as they come out supporting the 'other theory' you will continue to believe your conspiracy 'theory'.
Sad.
Nope. Something about it all just didn't look right to a lot of people. Now that we begin to take a closer look, to really think about it instead of just swallowing it, we slow things down, and a lot of the original ovservations come out.
What was tower #7 really? That thing just "getting pulled" like that is far from normal!
Who cares if the building was brought down on purpose? No lives were lost in that building. If you are using that as proof of demolition of the two towers then why didn't they fall the same way? Starting at the bottom instead of at point of impact. Please explain that to me professor!
thanks and not to get off the point of this thread...how can they suck with 26 champions rings. I never got that and never will. I will never root for them however, I do have my limitations! I will always cheer on the team that they are playing, I think it is inbedded in me. But I love baseball and I have grown up watching the Sox. Still lots and lots of baseball to be played.
None of the videos are doctored. They are taken from the the original television broadcasts, and looked at closely. Just like crime scene investigators do with evidence when they solve a crime. So why should the process for 9/11 be any different?
Because they were too tall. They couldn't have been taken from the bottom down. They actually DISINTEGRATED - yeah fucking disintegrated! from the top down at the speed of gravity again no doubt. That in itself is insane.
They would have fell like trees and damaged a lot of other buildings, if taken from the bottom up, which would make the disposal i mean "clean up" or "cover up" harder.
mmmmm....I am probably older than you and no I will not see past the insults, who is really being the kid? Trying being a little more adult if you want to get your point/opinion/theory/conspiracy across is all that I am saying. It would be a more powerful discussion.
What you over 40? hehe...it's all the same over 35. Yes please give me more lessons on being adult
I do what I do for a reason, unbeknownst to the casual observer
not exactly, both of those reports are based on the "official" story.
For the record, I don't know what happened on 9/11. I find a lot of the conspiracy theories as hard to swallow as the official story. Frankly, the data is incomplete.
I have yet to hear from the two guys who are at the wheel of the country at the time. When they decide to testify I'll listen to their sworn testimony and consider making a more concrete stance.
what's really sad is how quickly fearful americans are to take the word of known liars
Take for example Brigham Young physics professor Steven Jones (no relation to Alex Jones). He claims he has proven that the WTC towers were taken down by a product used in controlled demolitions called Thermate (made primarily out of thermite).
Not knowing shit about physics myself, I can't exactly take his word for it. And since Professor Jones is also famous for a book about supposed evidence for Jesus having visited the Americas after he rose from the dead, a principal beliefs of Mormons, I have a reason NOT to take his word for it.
http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i42/42a01001.htm
Then what is your point with these videos? What are trying to prove?
Yes they did disintergrate, that's what happens when thousands of pounds of steel and concrete fall from a thousand feet in the air. It doesn't prove that charges were used.
~Ron Burgundy
look for yourself, the building was blown up as it went down. It's pretty obvious:
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-3173519241898945782&q=tower+collapse
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-7961056561589268281&q=tower+collapse
The towers vaporized on the way down. You have got to be kidding me.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-5970646083538768309&q=tower+collapse
With the vast knowledge of engineering that I am sure you have, you must realise that the lower the strike, the more detremental.
this is do mainly to strain/stress an heat dterioization. if the planes had been low on fuel, they likely would have stood.
I am sure you realise that the tower design was even stronger than that of the empire state building, which withstood a B25....which was not carrying as much fuel
And I won't make the same mistakes
(Because I know)
Because I know how much time that wastes
(And function)
Function is the key
applauds
sometimes, things are exactly as r=they seem....why do people want to make this more complex than it is?
And I won't make the same mistakes
(Because I know)
Because I know how much time that wastes
(And function)
Function is the key
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-5061514770009171572&q=tower+collapse
WTC building design - pancake theory impossible:
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=2724976424725060242&q=tower+collapse
Just wanted to clearify a few points here about the 9/11 theories.
First of all there is a serious group of level-headed people that are looking at the facts. They tend to think that the buildings were brought down using Thermate as Prof. Jones had discovered. I did some reading up on the oxidization of steal, and looked at some of the photographs Jones presented. It does appear to be what he said. Additionally the same evidence was reported in the FEMA report in the appendices. They said "further investigation is needed" but haven't investigated it. Underwriter Laboratories that certified the steal, would have checked for any sulfurization, they claim the steal met specifications. The evidence Prof. Jones has uncovered implies explosives were used.
In controlled demolitions, self-implosions are done by severing the core columns at the basement level. To weaken the load-balancing infrastructure. The laws of inertia do not allow a buildings top 5 floors to pulverize the bottom 70 floors, without first removing it's main supports. Anyone who has done their research will recall a photo of a firefighter standing infront of a diagonally severed support colum, which molten metal hanging from it.
Historically when planes crash into buildings and the buildings burn, they do not collapse. When burning structures begin collapse, small portions break off. The air resistance is much less than the remaining structure so they tend to be deflected off.
There is irrefutable evidence to support this theory. The questions of who and why are much more open to opinion. The most prominent answer of who is the Bush administration. The why is attributed to control of regions, people or money.
Then you have the crowd that will believe any theory. That little spacepods were floating in the air and projecting a holographic image over the missiles to make them look like jets. Not entirely impossible, but not likely and there is no evidence to support it. I would imagine many of these people think Bush is a reptile. The JFK assassination is a typical conspiracy. Two investigations and trials stated there was a clear conpsiracy. Still the records of the assassination are locked in FBI files until 2039. In this particular case, great care was taken to destroy the evidence. Not much exists that isn't already known, save a confession.
If you have never met a crooked cop or a con man. Then you might think everyone in the government is 100% pure. Unfortunately that is not the case. Realistically speaking, not many of them are even 50% pure in the upper eschelon. Many people have spoken out about crooked conduct. It's happened time and time again. Yet, some people, refuse to believe them.
Did you hear where Professor Jones got his 'Thermate' sample? I just watched him on C-Span.
First something to get framiliar with:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_of_custody
Prof. Jones states that he got the tiny sample from a woman who scraped what she thought to be dirt off of a piece of supposed WTC steel that was to be part of a memorial somewhere. She kept the dirt in a bucket and it wasn't until she became aware of the Professor's research that she came forward.
No folks. I'm not making this shit up! :rolleyes:
Coming from the same guy who wrote this...
http://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/jones/rel491/handstext%20and%20figures.htm
Here's what his own colleagues had to say about his 'research'.
The BYU physics department has issued a statement:
"The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones's hypotheses and interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of World Trade Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and practitioners, including many of BYU's own faculty. Professor Jones' department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review."
The Fulton College of Engineering and Technology department has also added
"The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones."
But don't let this kinda stuff get in the way of your belief.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=2724976424725060242&q=tower+collapse
BYU Physics professor and founder of SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 TRUTH Steven E Jones presents his presentation on the collapse of WTC Buildings 1,2, and 7 on 9/11. A very informative and scientific presentation that raises serious questions about the official account of the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586&q=wtc+collapse
Yeah, they assumed that a if a 707 was going to hit the towers, the plane would not be full of fuel.
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
they are just protecting themselves. they don't want people to think they are "cooky", because the majority of people don't want to accept that idea.
~Ron Burgundy
And you're not leaving here without me, I don't wanna be without
My best... friend. Wake up, to see you could have it all
Whatever floats your boat! Like I said, don't let any info that I post get in the way of your beliefs
It sure wouldn't be the first time a scientist has done some crazy stuff and been seen as a nut job. The stereotypical scientist portrayed in movies is usually a bit nuts. Why do you think that is? Do you think people thought that Einstein was all upstairs? Well of course he wasn't.
Prof. Jones at least is coherent and takes his time looking at stuff. How do you know his other work isn't correct?
I mean come on. There is no way a huge kerosene fireball made it down the elevator shaft 80 floors and exploded with enough force to knock marble panels off the walls. When you see the jet fuel explode outside of the building it last a mere second. How do you suppose this fireball lasted long enough to make it to the lobby? Avoiding elevators and with very little oxygen. If you believe that, I don't know, you should upgrade your schools.
How did you come to this conclusion? What experience did you draw on? What kinds of research was done to disprove this?
Umm, experience, if you turn on your lighter. Does the flame extend for 1000 feet? No! Because it's not possible. Do you know how much fuel would be required to make this happen? In both buildings? I mean give me a break. The odds of this happening the way stated by NIST is 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 at least. Further more, they admit they can't explain the sulfur in the molten metal. They just pick the first conclusion that enters there minds. They were intent on giving people an answer, not necissarily the right one. They performed model tests and all their tests failed. They had to make a computer simulation and after changing some of the metrics finally got it to happen like it did. They had to use false information. That's not science, that's a cover-up.
I see. So you have no proof and only your experince with a cigarette lighter to come to the conlusion that the NIST report is wrong.
Can you show how you arrived at the odds of "1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 at least."?
Don't feel bad about your lack of actual scientific proof. Prof Jones hasn't done much better than yourself.
"Don't Stop Believing" -- Journey