911 Truth Movement

[Disco08]

No need to read the reports, read the abstracts and the conclusions if you like, the rest is really just calculations. There are photos.

Yeah, it's heavy going at times.

The point I was trying to make is that if the outside structure is part of the support system, wouldn't that mean 80% or so remained intact in both cases?

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Yeah, it's heavy going at times.

The point I was trying to make is that if the outside structure is part of the support system, wouldn't that mean 80% or so remained intact in both cases?

Yup but it wouldn't matter. Once they were sliced and some fell off they were no longer supporting the structure above them.

 

[Rosy]

Hmm, you might be right Rosy, although I'm aware of the missile argument given by 911 sceptics. THB I've just been skimming these posts. I was under the impression tho that Harry was saying that he thought the terrorist attacks were real, just facilitated by the US hierarchy.

Some of Harry's comments in regards to whether it was a plane or not-

don't know what did it, but it looks more like the work of a bunker buster missile than a commercial plane. just because it says it was a plane in the OR doesn't make it true.

it appears impossible that a commercial plane could do that sort of damage.

does it sit comfortably in your mind that a plane crashed into the pentagon (hitting the ground first by reports) and went through 6 layers of concrete walls to create a neat circular exit hole at the end? With no vision of significant wreckage and no vision of the plane when there were many cameras around and the FBI confiscated the vision from hotels accross the road? How can there be no vision? If it does then fine, but I can understand why it doesn't with some.

they knew once they told the people it was a commercial plane they would believe it so why bother.

so you are comfortable with the mainstream story that a Boieng 757 punched through 6 blast resistant concrete walls at the pentagon before exiting through a neat clean cut circle hole?

it still fell and no jet fuel was involved
for me WTC7 collapse and the smallish hole in the pentagon are massive questions
not to mention the passports found a few blocks away.

passports of the 2 hijackers found in the rubble?

how does a passenger plane create the small hole in the pentagon? where was the debris from the plane at the pentagon and the other that fell in the field? how can terrorists manouver such planes and hit their targets? the most heavily protected airspace in the world did not intercept the planes? training drills performed on the same day? bush not responding to "we're being attacked and just sitting there.

 

[Disco08]

Yup but it wouldn't matter. Once they were sliced and some fell off they were no longer supporting the structure above them.

Nah I mean if there's 4 walls all made to support the structure and only half of one was damaged, doesn't that leave more than 80% of the outer supportive structure intact?

Is there a laymans explanation available of how tower 2 fell before tower 1 despite burning for a much shorter time, having most or all of it's central support system intact and having at least 80% of it's outer support structure in place while most of the jet fuel ended up outisde the building? Are all those facts accepted?

 

[Azza]

Some of Harry's comments in regards to whether it was a plane or not-

Okelly dokelly then.

 

[Chiang Mai Tiger]

And just as a gauge Disco what are your thoughts on other conspiracy theories for:

Moon landing
Katrina
London tube bombing
Challenger
Stolen generation
Holocaust
Kennedy assassination

Here's one closer to home that has never been solved:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Hilton_bombing

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Nah I mean if there's 4 walls all made to support the structure and only half of one was damaged, doesn't that leave more than 80% of the outer supportive structure intact?

Is there a laymans explanation available of how tower 2 fell before tower 1 despite burning for a much shorter time, having most or all of it's central support system intact and having at least 80% of it's outer support structure in place while most of the jet fuel ended up outisde the building? Are all those facts accepted?

I found the photo I was looking for. The exterior steel was part of the support structure so if it goes it dumps the job on the internal supports many of which damaged or severed by the planes. So the entire load of the building above the impact is now loading just a few secondary supports and central core supports. The analysis of the structure concludes that due to the design any supports damaged or cut on one side of the building effectively de-stresses the loads on the opposite side, so only the core supports are taking virtually all of the load.

The percentages are effectively halved as a result of this. Remove or damage 1/3rd of the outer supports and you actually lose the opposite 1/3rd.

 

[Disco08]

Is that during collapse?

Tower 1 I understand. Tower 2 if you look at it the plane hits the corner of the building. The centre supports must have been close to all intact.

Surely designers knew this when considering aircraft crashes. Of course one crashing into the building would sever some of the outer supports. Even if cutting one side cause the opposite side to stop working as well you still have 70% or so of the outer support still working. Makes no sense to me just yet.

 

[Harry]

How would my being an engineer change an argument based only on logic? Yours versus mine. I have a rudimentary understanding of physics. How much energy did the plane have just before impact? The energy comprised of it's momentum plus all the energy in the unused fuel I imagine. If it disintegrated upon impact then all of that energy was transferred to the tower. What do think that would do? Now you've got all that energy plus you have severed much of building in half. All of the energy in the top section wants to go only one way and much of what was designed to keep up there it there is now gone. So all that energy is now trying to pull it down. You know the rest.

why would the levels below disintegrate into dust? can understand the levels around the impact zone burning and falling apart, but how can support steel and concrete designed to support such a massive structure explode into dust. we are supposed to believe the intense heat travelled down some 50 floors and more and melted the steel causing it to collapse like it did?

 

[Harry]

If the plane hit the pentagon there would be wreckage all over the place.

Why is there no plane wreckage in this picture? No seats, no engines, no wings, no luggage, no bodies.

 

[Streak]

they both serve the same master

Who?

 

[TigerForce]

I wonder why the Khalid Sheikh Mohammed trial keeps procrastinating.

 

[Harry]

where's the plane guys? If it was a plane the remains would be splattered everywhere.

 

[Harry]

oh, and don't show me that youtube clip with the piece of tin with the C on it

 

[Harry]

images of crash in shanksville

 

[Streak]

There's also evidence from firefighters that a lot fo jet fuel fell to the ground below - ankle deep in some places according to eyewitness report.

Where did you source this info from Disco.

 

[Disco08]

http://web.archive.org/web/20030408034647/http://www.teslapress.com/NBC%20html%20web%20version.htm

 

[Tigers of Old]

where's the plane guys? If it was a plane the remains would be splattered everywhere.

I actually agree with you on this one Harry. The crash site was very unusual. Certainly not as you'd expect to see on the face of it.

 

[Harry]

some other crash sites

 

[TigerForce]

I actually agree with you on this one Harry. The crash site was very unusual. Certainly not as you'd expect to see on the face of it.

Certainly was. If hit by a plane vertically, it would show a cross-shaped hole. If hit horizontally, the hole in the side of the building would be wider.