If you want to know how much steel was in the fire, go look up the WTC building plans. The information isn’t being concealed. Whatever the quantity of the steel, and the quantity of burning furniture, the latter affected the former, or do you have an alternate theory which we’ve yet to hear?
Moving the goalposts noted - my answer to you was in response to your cries about the amount of energy used in moving the building. Since you didn’t reply, I assume that you’re dropping the issue of how much of the plane’s energy was used to move the building those 12 inches. Can you verify that this is the case?
To answer your current question, no, it doesn’t really matter how much steel there was. Put steel in a fire for more than a few minutes and it fully heats up. It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking 1000 steel beams or 5000 steel beams. Why do you think that matters?
I Love conspiracy theories. One I’ve heard about this is the planes were not flown even, they were remote controlled from ground somewhere, the hijackers didn’t even know what was going on.
Is this technology possible and what are the flaws/ pros of it?
thanks.
It’s the most plausible of the CT’s on this subject. Sure, you COULD remote control the plane, especially if you set it up to do that. Heck, planes today can be remote flown and landed, if you have the proper access and codes. Certainly one could do a MythBuster’s style remote control of a plane easily enough.
Of course, there is no evidence that this happened. But it’s at least plausible…unlike the controlled demolition of the buildings CT, or the cruise missile into the Pentagon CT, or even the plane over Penn. shot down CT.
Sure, it’s possible. We remotely fly the Global Hawk for military uses. But airliners have not been fitted with this kind of capability - it would take a team of hundreds of people, working for a year or more (my guess) to get it working for an airliner, and after the attacks, each one would be a giant risk to the conspiracy. Just one person with a conscience and the lid’s blown.
The ugly truth is that you don’t need high tech remote-control if you have people willing to die when doing the job by hand.
I withdraw the comment. A quick Google search didn’t turn up what I thought I remembered (which was that the automatic navigation and remote landing feature on an airliner could be remotely accessed with the correct codes), and even if I’m not misremembering, it doesn’t really have anything to do with the actual discussion.
Well… I saw this issue in another thread, and thought it might be good fodder over here.
Debunk this:
There is no evidence of material transaction from the Taliban to AQ.
Ok, sure, I know there have been links to communications between the groups. One post was Time magazine, in which CNN and Prince Turki Faisal (an alleged Saudi AQ funder) are also involved… I did the breakdown way up thread.
So they allowed AQ/Osama to use their caves and mountains and that is not considered a transaction?
I wonder if Germany would had accepted that when we gave Great Britain the land lease program that that was not a material transaction so it was silly for Germany to suspect that we were helping Great Britain in WWII.
The crux of my difficulty is ‘allowed’. I don’t think the Taliban had the last word on this. OBL predates the Taliban in the region, and presumably can muster more clout if it comes down to that. Am I wrong?
[QUOTE=Try2B Comprehensive]
The crux of my difficulty is ‘allowed’. I don’t think the Taliban had the last word on this.
[/QUOTE]
Ok…why don’t you think this? What evidence are you using to determine it? You’ve been shown that there was a relationship between the Taliban and AQ…they INVITED AQ to come to Afghanistan after AQ was tossed out of their previous home. You obviously don’t accept this, for some reason…so, what’s the reason? What are you basing it on?
ObL was in Afghanistan during the formative years of the Taliban, yes. So what? Al Qaeda wasn’t in the region continuously during the civil war years after the Soviets left…they were in the Sudan (as has already been pointed out to you).
I think I’ve linked to this at least 4 times during this discussion with you…I REALLY wish you’d read it.
There are better cites than this Wiki article if you do some Googling, but this one has a lot of the timeline data, even if it doesn’t go into much depth on each subject. But you don’t seem to want to hear any of this stuff.
My question is, what are you driving at with all of this? Do you think that AQ forced it’s way into Afghanistan, that the Taliban really didn’t want them there but were powerless to do anything about it? Or do you think that AQ was always there and, again, the Taliban were powerless to do anything about it? Assuming that IS what you think, why do you think it? What do you base your conjecture on? Assuming this is what you think, and even assuming you were correct (you wouldn’t be), then…well, what difference does it make? AQ was STILL THERE…regardless of if the Taliban wanted them there or not. That’s where they bases were, that’s where their C&C was, that’s where the leadership was, the training and logistics facilities, etc etc. Whether the Taliban wanted AQ there or not is irrelevant…it’s where they were when they attacked us. The only choice the Taliban had was to work with the US or to oppose the US. It was a binary solution set.
It is very far fetched if not impossible. 767’s use old cable and pulley driven technology, endless motors and servos would have to be installed that would not show and not be discovered at pre-flight inspection. There is a huge question if there would even be room for the installation in the think walls of the plane.
These and many other reasons why the idea is borderline preposterous are addressed below. (And we have not even addressed the huge latency issue)
Well, I said it’s the most plausible…that doesn’t mean it’s very plausible.
When the air lines test planes for a crash they use, afaik, remote controls. I don’t think this would be TOO hard to accomplish, though it would take extensive refitting of the air craft. The things that make this highly unlikely are, A) The pilots would have noticed if someone was taking over the plane remotely (presumably they would have completely lost control of the plane at this point), and probably would have mentioned this in their radio transmissions (instead of mentioning the fact that they had been hijacked), and B) you couldn’t put in remote controlling system into the planes without the same kinds of extensive modifications that it would have taken to wire the buildings for explosive demo…IOW, it would have been pretty visible, especially while the work was being done.
Again, I was simply saying that this is more probable than, say, the use of nano-thermite or whatever to bring the buildings down…which means it goes form totally whack job bughouse nuts to snow balls chance in hell probability.
