9/11 Conspiracy Thread

#2,026
#2,026
ajvol01 said:
I'm honestly not trying to push your buttons.

However, it seems like you're taking all the 9/11 WTC truther theories that you're familiar with and assigning belief in those to me.

I asked you 1 simple question and you replied with a memo of 10 answers / suggestions / questions to things that I do not remember saying to you or anyone else in this thread.

The truth is that I simply don't believe the explanation/official story we've been given based on the contradictory evidence that exists.

To me, the molten steel is the key piece of evidence that forensically contradicts the official story of 9/11. Based on the official story - molten steel simply should NOT have been there. I don't claim to know what melted the steel, but I do know the jet fuel and building fires did not melt steel.

No matter if the fires burned for 5, 10 or 100 days at 1600 F it would not melt steel or explain molten steel.
Click to expand...
i answered your question "no idea what it was"

I then asked my own series of questions. Are you the only one that gets to ask?
 
#2,027
#2,027
rjd970 said:
The designers knew that there was at least some risk that with buildings that tall that a plane could possibly hit them. They were meant to absorb the impact and if they fell, go straight down as opposed to toppling over. They were engineered to fall the way they did, not demolished to fall that way.
Click to expand...
They were intended to take hits by planes and stand.
9-11 Research: Towers' Design Parameters
 
#2,032
#2,032
NurseGoodVol said:
They were intended to take hits by planes and stand.
9-11 Research: Towers' Design Parameters
Click to expand...
There's a documentary on the architect and his design of the twin towers. It goes into pretty good detail of the structure and etc. with computer models, construction videos and photos..... and how they were designed to withstand the impact of a plane and why they ultimately fell.... and why they fell in the manner they did .... can't recall the name though.
 
#2,033
#2,033
Carl Pickens said:
There's a documentary on the architect and his design of the twin towers. It goes into pretty good detail of the structure and etc. with computer models, construction videos and photos..... and how they were designed to withstand the impact of a plane and why they ultimately fell.... and why they fell in the manner they did .... can't recall the name though.
Click to expand...
I thought i was going to die reading the NIST report ... Like 442 pages. I've read several reports, watched all the videos, i think I've watched the one you are referencing. My advice, don't read the NIST report.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#2,034
#2,034
ajvol01 said:
I'm honestly not trying to push your buttons.

However, it seems like you're taking all the 9/11 WTC truther theories that you're familiar with and assigning belief in those to me.

I asked you 1 simple question and you replied with a memo of 10 answers / suggestions / questions to things that I do not remember saying to you or anyone else in this thread.

The truth is that I simply don't believe the explanation/official story we've been given based on the contradictory evidence that exists.

To me, the molten steel is the key piece of evidence that forensically contradicts the official story of 9/11. Based on the official story - molten steel simply should NOT have been there. I don't claim to know what melted the steel, but I do know the jet fuel and building fires did not melt steel.

No matter if the fires burned for 5, 10 or 100 days at 1600 F it would not melt steel or explain molten steel.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure there was molten steel.
 
#2,037
#2,037
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Scheer: The Illegal CIA Operation That Brought Us 9/11
Click to expand...

So now it's that the actual attacks were all legit (hijackers real, building collapse real, plane hit Pentagon, etc) but it's about who knew what and when. Interesting.

FWIW I think pretty much all the cruise missiles/controlled demo/etc conspiracy is pure twaddle. The only conspiratorial things that ever seemed to hold water at all are:

It's possible (not remotely saying it happened) that Flight 93 was shot down. If it was identified as a probable flying bomb the decision to lose X amount of lives over Y(larger) amount of lives makes sense. The reason to keep it quiet is because, on top of what already happened, the country just didn't need to hear about us having to shoot down our own. If true (and again, not saying it happened) it would have been an agonizing decision but actually make sense in the context of the situation.

The "somebody knew and let it happen" story.

It's a major, HUGE consideration for plausibility that both these conspiracy theories do not rely on the absolutely hysterical amount of widespread complicity, gigantic witness suppression (for instance it was 9:37 AM on a ****ing Tuesday when Flight 77 hit the Pentagon...OF COURSE people saw the plane and not a cruise missile) and Rube Goldberg machine dreamed up by Wile E Coyote on a bad ayahuasca trip planning.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top