Rather delusional thinking. 9-11 has a lot of unusual issues, the main one being that no commercial airliner has ever struck a building like the twin towers before. The science is - the best guess based on known factors that they can come up with (unknown factors being how the whole building interacts on impact by a commercial plane). Certainly the reports have problems with them. That is nothing particularly unusual for a first event of it's kind that gets picked over after the fact for problems. And certainly there are many other issues.
But none of those conspiracy theories address the human factor. For example, I could well believe that particular rich & powerful men within the CIA or Government wanted to bring down the twin towers for their own enrichment......but then there is the operational human factor - the need for those rich and powerful men to find:
- multiple engineers willing to mass murder
- have those educated men together as a unit
- under the direction of a manager (otherwise they overlap jobs, or miss parts necessary to demolition etc, no matter how competent at the individual pieces they are)
- with those engineers knowing those rich and powerful men will likely kill them afterwards to keep them silent
- and those engineers stay silent afterwards (usually at least a few will suffer guilt - it is a massive slaughter)
- and no mass body count of engineers turning up
It fails on the human front. The people needed to carry it out. Most people that believe the conspiracy have been watching way too many movies, or forgotten what is involved in human nature.
The point is - oralloy has every right to not believe in the conspiracy. Your putting words in his mouth appears to be founded in bitterness.
The need to scream and call names, immediately upon people disagreeing with you, is usually only found in young teenagers.
I'm aware of the melting point argument, and the molten metal coming from the structure. You obviously didn't read my post about it being unknown how a whole building interacts with the impact - ie:
- did the impact break the girders away from the concrete: this question relates both to the nature of concrete&reinforced concrete, and to the girders themselves (ie. did the girders start bearing almost the whole weight of the building above)
- once heated, how does the weight of the building above contribute to the heating of the girders.
I haven't seen any answers to these questions relating to interaction - only facts in isolation to the whole.
Even so, I see you are unable to answer my questions regarding the human element of bringing down the towers. As I said - I haven't read anywhere, any conspiracy theorist who as even bothered to ask themselves about the human element (the questions I listed).
The point is, people have every right to not buy the conspiracy theory.
That said, this is a China-Iran thread, is it not.
Even so, I see you are unable to answer my questions regarding the human element of bringing down the towers. As I said - I haven't read anywhere, any conspiracy theorist who as even bothered to ask themselves about the human element (the questions I listed).
The point is, people have every right to not buy the conspiracy theory.
The only conspiracy theory is the usa official conspiracy theory for which there is no evidence. The human element has nothing to do with evidence or science. It is a red herring played by those who can't do the science, facts, evidence.
I see you couldn't answer the questions relating to how the whole building interacts.
Another red herring. Try focusing on the myriad impossibilities of the usa government conspiracy theory that make it false/impossible like zero OBL involvement, no Muslim hijackers, the molten/vaporized steel that shows there were no Muslim hijackers.
Quote:
It's impossible for a conspiracy to exist without people to carry it out.
We know there were folks to do that because Muslims didn't plant the the usa military nanothermite. We know that Muslim hijackers didn't exist therefore the usa conspiracy theory is a huge lie.
Another red herring. Try focusing on the myriad impossibilities of the usa government conspiracy theory
- I have acknowledge the issues, and
- I acknowledge that the nature of the event is unprecedented (which works for and against either side); and
- I acknowledge that all conspiracies need the human element to be explainable (otherwise no conspiracy can exist)
That is, I don't jump to conclusions just because I want to. I want to be able to answer questions that are important to the subject. I don't go 'because I can't answer X, then Y must have existed' when Y has it's own unique problems.
A couple of side issues:
- no one can truly prove whether muslim hijackers were aboard. That includes both the government, and conspiracy theorists. There is too much ability to misinform others in todays world.
- as for powdered / vapourised steel. Not even the conspiracy explains that (my last recollection is that they came up with some sci fi explanation).
That is to point out, once again - that people have every right to not buy the conspiracy theory.
0 Replies
oralloy
1
Reply
Wed 18 Sep, 2019 03:26 pm
@vikorr,
vikorr wrote:
I'm aware of the melting point argument, and the molten metal coming from the structure.
Molten aluminum. Not molten steel.
vikorr wrote:
did the girders start bearing almost the whole weight of the building above
Only once the actual collapse was already in motion.
Some of the main support columns were severed by the plane strike, but enough of the main support columns remained intact to support the weight of the building.
The fire heated and weakened the steel however, and eventually the main support columns were no longer able to support the weight of the building above them.
Right before the collapse, some of the perimeter columns were filmed buckling inward.
Once the main support columns no longer had the strength to support the weight of the building, the top of the building dropped about ten feet, crushing a single level and placing the entire weight of the upper structure onto girders that were designed only to support the weight of a single floor.
Those girders held the weight for less than a second before giving way, crushing the level beneath them, and placing all of the weight on the girders for the floor below them.
Those girders held the weight for less than a second before giving way, crushing the level beneath them, and placing all of the weight on the girders for the floor below them.
Those girders held the weight for less than a second before giving way, crushing the level beneath them, and placing all of the weight on the girders for the floor below them.
You can actually hear the floors collapse. The first few floors that collapse sound like semi-auto gunfire.
Then as the collapse gains momentum, the collapsing floors sound like a machine gun.
Then as the collapse gains even more momentum, the collapsing floors sound like a Gatling gun.
vikorr wrote:
That said, this is a China-Iran thread, is it not.
Not anymore. First you and now I have discussed 9/11 on this thread. JTT will never let it go now.
Only once the actual collapse was already in motion.
See, I think it happened earlier. Cement is weak without sand & congregate, to become concrete. Concrete is strong but brittle. But when reinforced, particularly with metal rods / mesh, the composite becomes stronger than the individual parts. But because the girders were themselves hugely solid, they would have jolted/moved with the impact, which would have structurally weakened the surrounding concrete. I personally don't see how the concrete could not be weakened / separated from it's reinforcing.
Quote:
Not anymore. First you and now I have discussed 9/11 on this thread. JTT will never let it go now.
Don't know about that. There's plenty of oddities surrounding the collapse. And he couldn't answer the questions, particularly in relation to the human element.
But the only point of those posts such out was not being able to explain X (or even getting X wrong) does not mean Y happened, and unanswered questions don't equate to a 'proven conspiracy'. Ie. people should be able to believe what they believe in such circumstances, and accusing others of supporting mass murder in such circumstances when they say they don't believe it, is plain delusional.
How did you determine that was steel and not aluminum or copper? And as a steelworker electrician for 42 years I can tell you steel docent have to melt to bend and degrade at temperatures much lower than melting point. But this has been pointed out to you neumoras times but you refuse to accept the facts over your fantasies.
You have no evidence for such the silly notion above, oralloy, but do try to find some.
The rest of your nonsense is drivel. If you stole it from somewhere/someone you ought to own up and admit it and then provide the source. If it is your own drivel, it can't be dismissed outright because you have illustrated you know nothing about the science and evidence of 9-11. You didn't even know that nanothermite exists. Nobody can trust anything you say.
0 Replies
JTT
-2
Reply
Wed 18 Sep, 2019 03:56 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
Some of the main support columns were severed by the plane strike, but enough of the main support columns remained intact to support the weight of the building.
Such imprecise drivel!! You know you are lying because the molten and vaporized metals, all with melting/vaporizing temperatures far above the temperatures of the WTC fires, maximum 1300F, show the usa official conspiracy theory is an impossible fable.
0 Replies
JTT
-1
Reply
Wed 18 Sep, 2019 04:00 pm
@vikorr,
Quote:
I personally don't see how the concrete could not be weakened / separated from it's reinforcing.
That only illustrates just how little you know of construction. The vast majority of the concrete was pulverized into micron sized particles. We all saw the pyroclastic flows that came as the towers were blown into smithereens. Gravity collapses DO NOT have the necessary energy to do that to the steel reinforced concrete. Those were controlled demolitions.
0 Replies
vikorr
1
Reply
Wed 18 Sep, 2019 04:00 pm
@oralloy,
You were right. Apparently he believes it is a 9-11 thread.
And as a steelworker electrician for 42 years I can tell you steel docent have to melt to bend and degrade at temperatures much lower than melting point. But this has been pointed out to you neumoras times but you refuse to accept the facts over your fantasies.
The same silly old red herring, Rabel. It doesn't matter a fig what temperatures steel will soften at. The fires in WTCs 1, 2 and 7 were maximum 1300F and yet we had molten steel 2800F and vaporized steel 4900F. Vaporized lead 3180F, huge volumes of iron microspheres, a major by product of nanothermite explosions, 150 times normal 2800F, molten molybdenum 4700F, ... .
0 Replies
JTT
-2
Reply
Wed 18 Sep, 2019 04:06 pm
@vikorr,
You are discussing 9-11 with oralloy, vikorr. Aren't religious people supposed to be honest?
