A Conspiracy You Believe or Wouldn't Be Shocked If Real

#301
#301
#302
#302
n_huffhines said:
It was damaged severely

View attachment 744383
Click to expand...
this is one of those conspiracies that I was really big into believing and pushing myself until I understood how buildings work. previously I had heard about "safety factors", and the design loads, and figured that would have been enough to keep the buildings up even after some damage. I also didn't understand the "mechanics" behind how a building is built. I also bought into the bs about steel is stronger than aluminum.

Its not one single piece of steel that goes from the foundation to the roof. the columns may span multiple floors in one piece, but at some point there has to be a joint. same thing with the beams, there isn't one beam that goes from one side of the building to the other, with the columns supporting it at various points. while the columns may span multiple floors, probably 3/4 max, the beams are only going to go from one column to the next. so taking out even one column, is also going to take out 3 beams, then multiply that by however many floors that singular piece of column spans, and by however many columns were impacted. and that one plane is a real big deal.

along those lines no system is built to survive removing a column like that. even with the safety factor being 10/20/50% over the design load. that design load is spread out over the whole footprint of the building. the system is designed to be stronger than extra load, it is not designed to survive being made weaker. and it is also a lot easier when you can count on a whole building to distribute a load, that is why new construction there is so much shoring and extra support, because until you complete it, its not going to work like it should. you take out a couple columns and all those loads can't be distributed like they should. those loads need a structural path to be distributed to all the pieces, you take out one of those pieces and the load can't be shared to the next adjacent "good" column, because there is no path to get from one good column to the next, if a column in between had been compromised.

the aluminum vs steel thing is also dumb. lead bullets can penetrate steel plates. look at any hurricane or tornado damage and you will see crazy things, wood branches or 2x4 going thru concrete blocks. I have seen a #2 pencil embedded into the steel door of a fridge. speed kills. and you don't need the whole column to fail, just one part of it is compromised, and the whole thing is pretty useless.

I still get questioning the narrative surrounding the WTC, but the collapse makes sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and n_huffhines
#303
#303


I freely admit that I am not sure exactly what happened on 9.11. This large group of architects and engineers make some good points though. Especially pertaining to bldg7...which was never struck by an aircraft and isnt very close to the 2 towers that were.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth | WTC Twin Towers and Building 7

AE911Truth is a nonprofit organization that represents more than 3,000 architects and engineers who are calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 on 9/11.
www.ae911truth.org www.ae911truth.org

Theres a 30 sec video of the freefall of bldg7 right there on the link .
 
Last edited:
#304
#304
marcusluvsvols said:


I freely admit that I am not sure exactly what happened on 9.11. This large group of architects and engineers make some good points though. Especially pertaining to bldg7...which was never struck by an aircraft and isnt very close to the 2 towers that were.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth | WTC Twin Towers and Building 7

AE911Truth is a nonprofit organization that represents more than 3,000 architects and engineers who are calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 on 9/11.
www.ae911truth.org www.ae911truth.org

Theres a 30 sec video of the freefall of bldg7 right there on the link .
Click to expand...

2 seconds of looking into their bs claims
""Steel buildings do not globally collapse due to fire, and yet on 9/11, we're told that three of them came down from office fires alone in the same day.""


these A-holes are just straight up being dishonest. and trying to compare a commercial airliner filled with jet fuel slamming into a building at a couple hundred miles an hour to a residential or commercial office fire caused by a microwave shorting out is the type of bold facing dishonesty I have to come to expect from these clowns.

its real simple. go to any of these so called architects and engineers. tell them you are going to suddenly removed several floors of columns and beams from one of their projects, while dumping who knows how much jet fuel into a fire, and see how they react. schmucks
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens, SpaceCoastVol, marcusluvsvols and 2 others
#305
#305
LouderVol said:
2 seconds of looking into their bs claims
""Steel buildings do not globally collapse due to fire, and yet on 9/11, we're told that three of them came down from office fires alone in the same day.""


these A-holes are just straight up being dishonest. and trying to compare a commercial airliner filled with jet fuel slamming into a building at a couple hundred miles an hour to a residential or commercial office fire caused by a microwave shorting out is the type of bold facing dishonesty I have to come to expect from these clowns.

its real simple. go to any of these so called architects and engineers. tell them you are going to suddenly removed several floors of columns and beams from one of their projects, while dumping who knows how much jet fuel into a fire, and see how they react. schmucks
Click to expand...

People nowadays are unable to accept the most plausible (and often simplest) answer. Everyone needs to make things more complicated than it needs to be. I'm not sure if its because of everyone watching Xfiles in the 90's, participation trophy culture, they are unable to hold themselves accountable, or that everyone's on SSRI's (or a combination of it all)..but there's lots of crazy out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens
#306
#306
FLVOL_79 said:
People nowadays are unable to accept the most plausible (and often simplest) answer. Everyone needs to make things more complicated than it needs to be. I'm not sure if its because of everyone watching Xfiles in the 90's, participation trophy culture, they are unable to hold themselves accountable, or that everyone's on SSRI's (or a combination of it all)..but there's lots of crazy out there.
Click to expand...
From my days in conspiracy land the typical line of arguments goes something like this:

1. thing happens.
2. official story comes out.
3. someone finds A hole in the official story.
4. now the whole official story must be bs.
5. conspiracies spiral out of control.
6. unless you buy into the deepest conspiracy presented you are a sheep.

the fault lies around step 3 imo. just because there is an issue, doesn't mean the whole thing is bs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernardKingGOAT and FLVOL_79
#307
#307
LouderVol said:
From my days in conspiracy land the typical line of arguments goes something like this:

1. thing happens.
2. official story comes out.
3. someone finds A hole in the official story.
4. now the whole official story must be bs.
5. conspiracies spiral out of control.
6. unless you buy into the deepest conspiracy presented you are a sheep.

the fault lies around step 3 imo. just because there is an issue, doesn't mean the whole thing is bs.
Click to expand...
The 9/11 stuff is a perfect example of google scholars working overtime.
 
#308
#308
FLVOL_79 said:
People nowadays are unable to accept the most plausible (and often simplest) answer. Everyone needs to make things more complicated than it needs to be. I'm not sure if its because of everyone watching Xfiles in the 90's, participation trophy culture, they are unable to hold themselves accountable, or that everyone's on SSRI's (or a combination of it all)..but there's lots of crazy out there.
Click to expand...
Years ago I saw a special of some kind that discussed the psychology of "conspiracy theorists". The show made a point of demarcating skepticism and CS. It's been too far back to remember much detail but one of the primary differences is the degree of being able to handle iffy/unknown situations and causation. The best example I ever saw was I wandered into some Bigfoot program right when it showed some dude wander over to a broken stick in the woods, look around slowly and announce with much gravitas "There's a squatch around here.". I immediately burst into laughter of course. Even if that was a dude feeding the gullible the idea was if there's something you can point to that "might" be something you want it to be you get to declare that as a fact even if the other side of "might" is "but just as, or even way more likely, not". Then there's just that sort of inner feel good of being in on something that other people just aren't privy to that starts a kind of gratification feedback loop. Basically that's where all the real* FLERFERs live.

*I say real above because I'm absolutely convinced there's a legit number of people larping as FLERFERs just to F around with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79
#309
#309
hndog609 said:
Years ago I saw a special of some kind that discussed the psychology of "conspiracy theorists". The show made a point of demarcating skepticism and CS. It's been too far back to remember much detail but one of the primary differences is the degree of being able to handle iffy/unknown situations and causation. The best example I ever saw was I wandered into some Bigfoot program right when it showed some dude wander over to a broken stick in the woods, look around slowly and announce with much gravitas "There's a squatch around here.". I immediately burst into laughter of course. Even if that was a dude feeding the gullible the idea was if there's something you can point to that "might" be something you want it to be you get to declare that as a fact even if the other side of "might" is "but just as, or even way more likely, not". Then there's just that sort of inner feel good of being in on something that other people just aren't privy to that starts a kind of gratification feedback loop. Basically that's where all the real* FLERFERs live.

*I say real above because I'm absolutely convinced there's a legit number of people larping as FLERFERs just to F around with them.
Click to expand...
Damn. Squatch'es everywhere if this is the all the anecdotal evidence needed!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens and hndog609
#310
#310
LouderVol said:
From my days in conspiracy land the typical line of arguments goes something like this:

1. thing happens.
2. official story comes out.
3. someone finds A hole in the official story.
4. now the whole official story must be bs.
5. conspiracies spiral out of control.
6. unless you buy into the deepest conspiracy presented you are a sheep.

the fault lies around step 3 imo. just because there is an issue, doesn't mean the whole thing is bs.
Click to expand...

I've noticed there's a lot of lying in the conspiracy community, too. IDK if that's new or it's just the emergence of internet trolls, but the amount of clearly photoshopped images I see passed around as evidence...it's one thing to get duped by that and pass it along. I can't believe the person doing the photoshopping gets kicks out of that kind of fabrication. If this is what the supposed Russian bots/trolls are doing, then I can understand that at least.
 
#311
#311
n_huffhines said:
I've noticed there's a lot of lying in the conspiracy community, too. IDK if that's new or it's just the emergence of internet trolls, but the amount of clearly photoshopped images I see passed around as evidence...it's one thing to get duped by that and pass it along. I can't believe the person doing the photoshopping gets kicks out of that kind of fabrication. If this is what the supposed Russian bots/trolls are doing, then I can understand that at least.
Click to expand...
I am willing to bet most of the trolls aren't foreign or bots. just home grown people trolling those who want to believe anything but the official story.

as long as they get to pretend they know more/better than the public most people looking into conspiracies don't really care what the truth actually is. they just want the rush of being better in some form or fashion.
 
#312
#312
LouderVol said:
2 seconds of looking into their bs claims
""Steel buildings do not globally collapse due to fire, and yet on 9/11, we're told that three of them came down from office fires alone in the same day.""


these A-holes are just straight up being dishonest. and trying to compare a commercial airliner filled with jet fuel slamming into a building at a couple hundred miles an hour to a residential or commercial office fire caused by a microwave shorting out is the type of bold facing dishonesty I have to come to expect from these clowns.

its real simple. go to any of these so called architects and engineers. tell them you are going to suddenly removed several floors of columns and beams from one of their projects, while dumping who knows how much jet fuel into a fire, and see how they react. schmucks
Click to expand...


I agree with most of this. The first thing I said in my post was that i am not sure what happened on 9.11. That said, building 7 was never hit by a jet, nor any other object that I have seen...in order to suffer any structural damage. The government report says that a fire started on 1 side of the building due to the other 2 bldgs coming down. If that IS true, IF, then a fire burning in this huge building caused freefall total destruction of B7...in its own footprint exactly like demolition?

In only a couple hours mind you. Surely there were sprinklers in this commercial building right? If a fire started in offices brought this whole building down freefall style then there are a LOT of questions that need to be answered IMO. I think that bldg7 needs serious scrutiny and i know too much history to trust the government regardless of who is running it at the time. The contents of a normal office building (including the sheetrock and metal stud walls providing fire rated walls separating every indivudual room as you know, and concrete/steel beam/rebar floors that dont burn AT ALL separating each floor from the floors above AND below it) should not have burned and caused a total structural collapse. I dont trust the government report at all, because it simply doesn't make sense pertaining to bldg7. Even moreso when the context of what was within bldg7, and the coming Patriot Act etc is added to the equation. I am not saying that 9.11 was a huge government conspiracy nor that bldg7 was definitely a demolition. I am saying that I believe the official story on that building is complete BS...and IF it were true and did fail from a single fire...then heads should have rolled and people should have been in court from the owners, to contractors, to the fire marshall who inspects the buildings. What happened should not have happened, under any circumstances. Bldg7 isnt even that close to the 2 towers that came down from what I understand. Count me as skeptical of the narrative.
 
#313
#313
marcusluvsvols said:
I agree with most of this. The first thing I said in my post was that i am not sure what happened on 9.11. That said, building 7 was never hit by a jet, nor any other object that I have seen...in order to suffer any structural damage. The government report says that a fire started on 1 side of the building due to the other 2 bldgs coming down. If that IS true, IF, then a fire burning in this huge building caused freefall total destruction of B7...in its own footprint exactly like demolition?

In only a couple hours mind you. Surely there were sprinklers in this commercial building right? If a fire started in offices brought this whole building down freefall style then there are a LOT of questions that need to be answered IMO. I think that bldg7 needs serious scrutiny and i know too much history to trust the government regardless of who is running it at the time. The contents of a normal office building (including the sheetrock and metal stud walls providing fire rated walls separating every indivudual room as you know, and concrete/steel beam/rebar floors that dont burn AT ALL separating each floor from the floors above AND below it) should not have burned and caused a total structural collapse. I dont trust the government report at all, because it simply doesn't make sense pertaining to bldg7. Even moreso when the context of what was within bldg7, and the coming Patriot Act etc is added to the equation. I am not saying that 9.11 was a huge government conspiracy nor that bldg7 was definitely a demolition. I am saying that I believe the official story on that building is complete BS...and IF it were true and did fail from a single fire...then heads should have rolled and people should have been in court from the owners, to contractors, to the fire marshall who inspects the buildings. What happened should not have happened, under any circumstances. Bldg7 isnt even that close to the 2 towers that came down from what I understand. Count me as skeptical of the narrative.
Click to expand...
dude, no one is responsible for their design/construction if a foreign object of significant mass slams into the building and causes a fire and then collapse. you can only design for so much.

Building 7 was hit by debris. just google Building 7 damage. you will find pictures of two areas hit by something before the fire and the collapse. these were areas of damage that impacted multiple floors.

Building 7 was not the only building struck by debris from the towers. it was not the only one that had a fire from the debris. most of the conspiracy theorists just overlook those facts. it is just the only one that fell.

if it stood for hours while a fire burned, it did its job. Sprinklers don't put out fires, they just suppress them until the fire department can get there. on 9/11 the fire department was a bit preoccupied, so that fire burned for longer. also, sadly, building codes are always reactive. at the time sprinkler systems didn't not require backup systems, or even multiple stand pipes. there were a whole lot of lessons learned and put into place from 9/11.
 
#314
#314
NCAA refuses to use trackman because officials are making Vegas money on “human error.”
 
#315
#315
LouderVol said:
2 seconds of looking into their bs claims
""Steel buildings do not globally collapse due to fire, and yet on 9/11, we're told that three of them came down from office fires alone in the same day.""


these A-holes are just straight up being dishonest. and trying to compare a commercial airliner filled with jet fuel slamming into a building at a couple hundred miles an hour to a residential or commercial office fire caused by a microwave shorting out is the type of bold facing dishonesty I have to come to expect from these clowns.

its real simple. go to any of these so called architects and engineers. tell them you are going to suddenly removed several floors of columns and beams from one of their projects, while dumping who knows how much jet fuel into a fire, and see how they react. schmucks
Click to expand...

The airplanes were probably doing closer to 500 mph, and carrying around 10,000 gallons of Jet A. I'm sure it didn't have any real effect though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernardKingGOAT
#316
#316
SpaceCoastVol said:
The airplanes were probably doing closer to 500 mph, and carrying around 10,000 gallons of Jet A. I'm sure it didn't have any real effect though.
Click to expand...
I can't believe the architects didn't the design the building to specifically withstand that common occurrence, or that the contractors didn't just magically build it strong enough to survive a once, well technically twice, in history event.

its also crazy to think that when not one, but two, 100+ story buildings collapse that an adjacent building might be damaged enough to also fall.

I get the questions about how much did W know, how the passports survived, and all that sort of stuff. but the buildings failing is just science.
 
#317
#317
I have zero clue about architecture or structural engineering so I will leave that up to the experts.

The bizarre thing I believe that gets overlooked on 911 is they just so happened to find the hijackers passports, boarding passes, and other documentation at the crash site. That is a bit of a stretch for me when the raging fire brought the buildings down and these were not incinerated.

I guess the hijackers could have rolled the windows down and littered before they landed…
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top