The *REALLY* crazy conspiracy theory: WTC buildings downed by controlled demolition

[Skywatcher]

@Silk One

You’re full of shit. But instead of explaining myself I’ll simply do what you do and say WRONG.

Prove it.

Fundamentalist Islam was created and aided by the US.

Al Qaeda’s forerunner was aided by the US, the US did not create it. It came into existence to counter the Russians.

On preview: what Bosda said.

Bin Laden was a CIA asset

Prove it.

No, allegations of Osama visiting the US under a CIA codename is not proof.

Cheney and Myers were in charge

Prove it.

of War Games that involved hijacking situations and false radar blips.

One simulated hijacking and those false radar blips would not have shown up on FAA screens. DoD and FAA have separate systems.

Taking a Boeing and having it hit the Pentagon while it hovers 10 ft above the ground

There was physical evidence that the left engine struck the ground before hitting the building. The reason the grass was relatively damaged is that the engine struck a concrete ventilation structure that protruded about 2" above the grass.

is IMPOSSIBLE according to pilots of the supposed plane.

What of the pilots who say the maneuver was possible but not recommended?

The supposed pilot was also not able to fly a Cessna.

Hanjour didn’t do well with Cessnas because he wasn’t concerned about learning how to land. Go figure.

The Pentagon has missle batteries set to destroy anything non-military crossing its airspace.

No. The Pentagon sits directly under a National Airport landing pattern and is about 200’ from another.

Edit: if it did have missile batteries, why would mobile missile batteries be parked there from 12 September 2001 until around 1 January 2002?

Andrews airforce base was a few miles from the Pentagon and couldn’t intercept the plane.

Not for a lack of trying.

No steel structure ever collapsed due to fire but 3 supposedly did in one day.

Wrong, as has already been demonstrated in this thread.

The 9/11 commission report doesn’t mention WTC7 which was obviously conventional demolition from the crack on the left side showing a main column being blown.

Conventional demolitions do not typically cause the demolished buildings to fall in different directions.

And you have Silverstein saying it was pulled.

“Pull” in demolition terms means to “pull down by wires”, not “implode”.

And then you had people that died in the basement. And no, fire couldn’t have gotten down there to blow stuff up because the elevators were osygen tight

Ah, yes, the old “oxygen tight” nonsense. Exactly when were these shafts made “oxygen tight”? They weren’t in '93. And how were people able to ride the elevators without suffocating?

were not straight down but divided in at least 3 parts.

Wrong. There was at least one express elevator that ran from the lobby to the roof, and the service elevators also ran in continuous shafts.

And I’m sorry, a collapsing building as the official story states would not go straight down…

They didn’t.

[The_Hamster_King]

@Silk One

Taking a Boeing and having it hit the Pentagon while it hovers 10 ft above the ground is IMPOSSIBLE according to pilots of the supposed plane. The supposed pilot was also not able to fly a Cessna. The Pentagon has missle batteries set to destroy anything non-military crossing its airspace. Andrews airforce base was a few miles from the Pentagon and couldn’t intercept the plane.

Lute Skywatcher has already hit all these points, but I’d like to focus on this one in particular.

If the explosion at the Pentagon was caused by a missile, then what actually happened to Flight 77? Where are all of those people?

And how do you respond to spifflog’s eyewitness account of the attack?

[Valgard]

@Silk One

You’re full of shit. But instead of explaining myself I’ll simply do what you do and say WRONG.

And I’m sorry, a collapsing building as the official story states would not go straight down, no matter what you say. Especially a building of that magnitude.

Well since I’ve made some of the structural arguments I’ll just go ahead and take this personally.

You need to put up or shut up. You have not made one argument or put forth any kind of evidence that holds water, and it’s all been repeatedly debunked with cited facts or at the very least informed opinions based on some actual credentials. You have ignored multiple requests for the same.

So just for giggles, let’s ask once again, in absolutely plain English:

What specific facts, education, knowledge or experience do you have which backs up your claims that what I’ve said about the collapse mechanism is wrong? Please note that “I think you’re wrong” is none of those.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

@Silk One

You’re full of shit. But instead of explaining myself I’ll simply do what you do and say WRONG.

Uh-huh. You failed already to support your claims. They are your claims. You need evidence. We fight ignorance around here, not promote it.

Fundamentalist Islam was created and aided by the US.

Islamic Fundamentalism predates the very existance of the US. Read some of the accounts of the seige of Malta back in the 16th century and tell me that these were the acts of moderates.

Bin Laden was a CIA asset

He was not.

Cheney and Myers were in charge of War Games that involved hijacking situations and false radar blips.

Cheney had near nothing to do with any War Games, and no false blips ever appeared (they hadn’t started the games yet). If anything, the games gave the advantage of making sure everyone was in their seat rather than having a supervisor in the coffee room.

Taking a Boeing and having it hit the Pentagon while it hovers 10 ft above the ground is IMPOSSIBLE according to pilots of the supposed plane.

It is not, according to pilots of the plane I have talked with.

The supposed pilot was also not able to fly a Cessna.

He had a Commercial Pilot’s Licence. They don’t just hand those out. Maybe you should read about his entire career of learning to fly rather than quoting some incident from early in his career.

The Pentagon has missle batteries set to destroy anything non-military crossing its airspace.

Wow. And here Ronald Reagan airport is only a few miles awaty. Must make for some nervous landings!

I’m going to get angry here:

THERE WERE NO GODDAMN MISSILE BATTERIES AT THE PENTAGON. THIS IS SHIT MADE UP BY THE FUCKING FRENCH CONSPIRACY FUCKER AND ALL THE CONSPIRACY PEOPLE PICKED IT UP WITHOUT CHECKING BASIC FACTS! THE PENTAGON IS IN A HEAVILY POPULATED AREA! IT IS NEAR A FUCKING MODERN COMMERCIAL AIRPORT! THE PENTAGON IS BUILT TO TAKE WW2 BOMBINGS! THE LAST THING YOU WANT TO DO IS SHOOT DOWN SOMETHING GOING OVER SOFT TARGETS TO SAVE A HARD ONE! THIS IS STUPID!

Andrews airforce base was a few miles from the Pentagon and couldn’t intercept the plane.

Because the planes were not armed. The ‘combat ready’ status means the planes could be deployed in 24 hours. It does not mean they were fueled up, armed and had briefed pilots ready to launch.

No steel structure ever collapsed due to fire

Sorry. WRONG! Kader toy factory, as one example, and the steel portion of the Madrid Windsor failed (the concrete portion remained standing)

but 3 supposedly did in one day. Many other structures have had larger, more intense, and longer raging fires and did not collapse.

Name them.

The 9/11 commission report doesn’t mention WTC7 which was obviously conventional demolition from the crack on the left side showing a main column being blown.

In fact it is sooooooo obvious that every engineer and demolitionist in the country disagrees with your asessment.

And you have Silverstein saying it was pulled. And no, IT does not mean people.

He was talking about people. He even clarified it later for the kooks who took that quote and ran to wonderland with it. Did you read the WT7 quote page that;s been linked to severeal times here>

And when they claimed the core was a hollow steel shaft they were saying that it was one big opening in the middle for stairways and elevators. And then you had people that died in the basement. And no, fire couldn’t have gotten down there to blow stuff up because the elevators were osygen tight and were not straight down but divided in at least 3 parts.

There are so many things wrong in this paragraph…

And I’m sorry, a collapsing building as the official story states would not go straight down, no matter what you say. Especially a building of that magnitude.

Why does every engineer in the world disagree? What expertise of yours do you base this asessment on?

[Larry_Borgia]

Taking a Boeing and having it hit the Pentagon while it hovers 10 ft above the ground is IMPOSSIBLE according to pilots of the supposed plane.

Absolutely. You have to wait for the Pentagon to land before attempting to hit it. Otherwise it will fire up its wormhole drive and disappear into subspace.

[XT]

Mr. Miskatonic, you are basically beating your head against a very thick wall. No need to get angry or frustrated…these kind of guys are usually immune to logic and facts, and they take your anger and frustration as signs that they are right (no, I don’t know how that works either…it just is) or are getting to you…or something.

You and others have already gone through this guy’s ridiculous list of assertions. If s/he bothers I’d like to see a cite on Bin Laden being a ‘CIA asset’…should be amusing, even if the guy is talking about the first Afghan war (I figure its some corruption of the facts based on the kernal of truth that the US supported the mujahadeen against the Soviets…or something like that).

As for the rest of the unsupported assertions…they are pretty standard fare for the CT tinfoil crowd and pretty easy to debunk. Not that these folks are receptive to the facts…and I wouldn’t bother unless s/he comes up with some cites from more than just the usual wide eyed CT web sites.

-XT

[Miller]

@Larry Borgia

Absolutely. You have to wait for the Pentagon to land before attempting to hit it. Otherwise it will fire up its wormhole drive and disappear into subspace.

Nah, all you have to do it wipe out the circle of Hippies, and it comes crashing down to the ground all by itself. But you don’t need a jet to do that, just the a firehouse and a whole lot of soap.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

I know what your getting at xtisme, what really bugs me is that this Silk One fellow is not merely a conspiracy theorist, but a lazy one at that. The stuff he has pulled out is pretty much straight out of the youtube videos without a lick of investigation or even thought. He just ran to a few conspiracy sites and that was all he (or she) needed. In some cases, the things brought up are int he same order as they appear in the videos. Pheh!

[tomndebb]

You’re full of shit.

You’re out of line.

It is permissible to attack an argument in this Forum. It is not permissible to attack a poster.

Cool it.

[ /Moderating ]

[CurtC]

@Silk One

f the government wants to stop being accused of being involved in 9/11 they only need to do a few simple things. There were numerous cameras at the Pentagon, and cameras at a nearby gas station (which the FBi stole the tape minutes after the impact). They just need to show us those tapes.

I’ve seen this claim by CTers pretty often, that there were other cameras at the Pentagon, but I’ve never seen any reason to believe it’s true. We have tapes from the two parking lot security cameras, from basically the same viewpoint, which captured only 0.5 frames per second. Oh, and the video from the gas station was released last year.

You are prolific at spewing a bunch of unsupported claims, but so far you haven’t stood your ground on anything. Around here, failure to support your case is the same thing as conceding the point.

So far, you have conceded every point you’ve made. If you have any that you’d actually like to stand behind, we’re ready.

[lowbrass]

@bobsled

One more thing and I’ll stop.

I must admit, I’m still a little shocked at the buildings coming straight down.
I know even strengthened steel will buckle under severe heat and strain, not just collapse uniformly.

I know, I know you got experts that say otherwise, but for someone with a high school science education and plenty on the job experience with steel and titanium, I’m still unbelieving that these buildings didn’t buckle and topple instead of basically falling in on them selves.

How does your “experience with steel and titanium” tell you that skyscrapers don’t fall straight down? Have you seen a skyscraper topple over sideways? Because I’m not aware of that ever happening. I would think it would have made the news. I’m wondering how you know that toppling over sideways is the “normal” way for a skyscraper to fall, when such a thing has never happened. Did you learn that in high school, or in your “experience” with steel?

If you watch the video of the collapse carefully, you will see that one (if not both) of the towers DID tilt to the side as it collapsed. But as has been explained, that entire top section of the building was too heavy to continue rotating outward. Gravity pulls things downward, and that’s what it did.

[Mangetout]

@CurtC

So far, you have conceded every point you’ve made. If you have any that you’d actually like to stand behind, we’re ready.

That’s the thing about conspiracy theories (as well as other pseudoscience mindsets) - the allegations don’t arise from the evidence - they arise from an overwhelming personal conviction that the idea is true - arguments based on evidence are secondary and therefore can be systematically debunked, one after another and the CTist will just keep coming back with another one.

[Loach]

@Mangetout

That’s the thing about conspiracy theories (as well as other pseudoscience mindsets) - the allegations don’t arise from the evidence - they arise from an overwhelming personal conviction that the idea is true - arguments based on evidence are secondary and therefore can be systematically debunked, one after another and the CTist will just keep coming back with another one.

The thing with the nutters is that they always fall back on the crutch “I’m only asking questions.” They can make 10 allegations, each one contradicting the other (It was Bush! It was Silverstein!) and they say “I’m only asking questions.” When you answer one allegation they roll out the one nutter with a degree that doesn’t agree and say “I’m only asking questions.” When *you * ask them questions, simple ones like “why?” and “how?” they don’t feel the need to answer because they are the ones asking the questions. If one of them could come up with a decent answer to why and how I might listen.

[kidchameleon]

@Mr. Miskatonic

Just as soon as you learn about basic metalurgy. Heat in metals does not move in the same rate as electricity.

And conductivity decreases with (increased) temperature.

[dropzone]

@Miller

Nah, all you have to do it wipe out the circle of Hippies…

But you will note that The Man didn’t allow the circle to be completed so Yog Sothoth still resides in the bowels of the Pentagon. It was a fortunate thing; the fools did not think of the evil they were attempting to unleash.

Crashing Flight 77 into it was nearly successful. However, not all walls were pierced and the world is still safe from the full power of His wrath. Instead, we need only deal with his accolytes, VP Cheney and Dread Secretary of Evil Reynolds. They, as pitiful mere humans, cannot do as much damage.

[Anne_Neville]

@Loach

A government which is competent enough to pull off this conspiracy would have been competent enough to find WMDs in Iraq, whether there were any there or not.

OK, suppose the government did fake 9/11. Now tell me why they didn’t do it again with some other landmark building when international and at-home support for the war in Iraq started going down, or when it seemed possible that George W Bush wouldn’t be re-elected, or when their party was in danger of losing control of Congress.

[Honesty]

@begbert2

Has anyone here heard of this theory? What do you think?

Never in a million years would I have expected such an enormous structure to simply collapse into a broken heap of rubble. There is apart of me that still refuses to believe it, but I do.

While it is abundantly clear that 9/11 strengthened and expanded the Bush administration’s power, I do not believe that the government orchestrated the attacks. There is simply no precedent that I can think of in which the United States killed its own civilians to start a brand-new war. I simply cannot believe our government, no matter how corrupt we may think it is, could carry out such an operation without getting caught.

Notwithstanding this, I’d like to see the computer simulations showing that the way the World Trade Center towers fell was expected given the laws of physics. Though I am sure it would cost billions of dollars, I’d also like to these computer simulations corroborated with in-field testing. This testing should include the recreation of the 9/11 attacks by propelling unmanned airplanes at a determined velocity at WTC-like structures and examining the results: Does it collapse? If so, how long does it take? Testing should also include arming a separate, but identical building with explosives to investigate whether its collapse is similar to how the WTC towers fell during 9/11. Finally, I would like to see the declassification of all materials relating to the 9/11 attacks in the very near future.

• Honesty

[Anne_Neville]

@Honesty

This testing should include the recreation of the 9/11 attacks by propelling unmanned airplanes at a determined velocity at WTC-like structures and examining the results: Does it collapse? If so, how long does it take? Testing should also include arming a separate, but identical building with explosives to investigate whether its collapse is similar to how the WTC towers fell during 9/11.

If the government did do this kind of testing, some conspiracy theorist would just say they rigged the tests as part of the conspiracy the same way they had rigged the original WTC, and we’re right back at square one.

[Telemark]

@Honesty

Though I am sure it would cost billions of dollars, I’d also like to these computer simulations corroborated with in-field testing. This testing should include the recreation of the 9/11 attacks by propelling unmanned airplanes at a determined velocity at WTC-like structures and examining the results: Does it collapse? If so, how long does it take? Testing should also include arming a separate, but identical building with explosives to investigate whether its collapse is similar to how the WTC towers fell during 9/11.

And I’d like a pony.

Come on, this isn’t needed. The computer simulations and structural analysis we have now is more then enough to demonstrate that what happened is what should have happened. This is pretty well understood without having to recreate things.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

@Honesty

Notwithstanding this, I’d like to see the computer simulations showing that the way the World Trade Center towers fell was expected given the laws of physics. Though I am sure it would cost billions of dollars, I’d also like to these computer simulations corroborated with in-field testing.

First of all: Simulation programs for this sort of thing cannot model the actual collapses. They can model events up the start of the collapse, but modeling past that cubes the variables, and it just won’t happen. Don’t exect faster computers to solve the problem anytime soon. It takes weeks to do a model without collapse elements, and any crash of the program means all data is lost.

This testing should include the recreation of the 9/11 attacks by propelling unmanned airplanes at a determined velocity at WTC-like structures and examining the results: Does it collapse? If so, how long does it take?

Frankly, I see no reason to spend money on a project that even most engineers say is not going to cut it. You have to simulate pretty much everything, that means little short of rebuilding the towers. All of this for the benefit of people who do not understand the engineering in the first place.

BTW, there are elements that you put into your wants that simple are not easy to do. For example, flying an unmanned 757 is much harder than flying a 6 foot drone. Flying it so that it impacts exactly like the planes hit the tower will be nearly impossible.

Testing should also include arming a separate, but identical building with explosives to investigate whether its collapse is similar to how the WTC towers fell during 9/11.

Again. Buildings cost money. I for one do not wish any of my tax dollars spent trying to satisfy a crowd that is likely to reject the findings or cherry pick them for differences.

Finally, I would like to see the declassification of all materials relating to the 9/11 attacks in the very near future.

Beyond the intelligence service materials, what exactly is classified? If you want something, fill out the damn FOIA forms.