8 Nagging Questions About 9-11

[Dr. Dan]

doc... just watch loosechange final cut... they address this fraudulent article with expert scientific researchers... nik.

prove it that they are right and all those other really good science articles are wrong.  How is it they are more right than the other scientists?  Or is it that you choose those scientists because it fits your persona these conspiracies that you call "truth"?  In other words, I sense bias on your part.

[nikmatdam]

no slayer... ask yourself this question instead... if 9/11 is so real... why are our borders as porous as they have ever been in the 230 odd years of this country's history...? any five yr. old would know to slam them shut in the aftermath of a real terrorist strike... and bush needed then to still get re-elected in '04... one more hit and he could have kissed it all goodbye... and they've found korans and prayer rugs in the desert... no the whole thing's a freakin' lie... they murdered their own people for political expediency and for psychological leverage over society... plain and simple... period... end of statement... nik. out...

[Taylor]

This is just sick the jihadis did it. I did not join the JTF to talk to wako conspiracy theorist.

[nikmatdam]

same question thrown right back in your face too doc... how do you know sc. amer. or popular science or national geographic is telling the truth...? who has more reason to lie...? the already considered lunatic fringe bringing on reputable experts who are then throwing their careers down the toilet...? or pop sci. or any other establishment journal that likes making corporate-sized profit margins and wants that to continue...? i'll take the lunatics any day over the "accepted" crap spewn forth by the gov't. controlled media any day of the week... even on shabat... nik. in disgust at this level of ignorance and naivete... out...

[briann]

and if the whole south side was totally engulfed as shown ... then why didn't it sag in and collapse like we saw at okl. city...? 

Okl city was bombed.  With bombing... if a steel beam is NOT destroyed by the initial blast... it will retain most if not all of its strength... and can support the metal beams that have collapsed... hence... causing sagging.  Therefore... some of the steel beams will remain standing (unless it has HUGE wait from the momentum of the stories above it collapsing above it.  This is why the OK bombing's damage is vertical... as if a cookie cutter cut into it... and not spherical... like the initial blast.


This is how nearly all buildings look when they are bombed... parts of it stay standing.. other parts are obliterated.

However. with burning.... nearly all the steel beams are weakend be the extreme heat... so that when the collapse finally happens... it will affect nearly the entire area (floor) since the entire floor has been weakened by the fire.

but no... it burns for three or more hours from that pic frame's time and then the whole thing goes down just like at a demolition...

Again... Ive already answered this.   Once the initial collapse happened from the weakest point after several hours of burning... it affects all the other nearby steel beams  since they have already been significantly weakened by the lheat.   Again.. much of the steel would have been at roughly 30% of normal strength.  And again.. Ive already answered the part about why after the initial collapse of the weakest floors.. why that extraordinary weight from the combined 20 or so floors above the collapse would have obliterated anything below it.   You can read my previous post about this.

and the holland one was straight down bec. not just one side was burning but you could see the whole bldg. front to rear on those top floors were fully consumed with fire... black as night... and you haven't answered my question from before that the collapse in that holland film and the twin towers...

 

Which holland fire are you speaking of?  I'll answer it when you elaborate here.

the bottom floors reacted differently... and if anything the twin tower structure was much stronger and many more floors for support... so they should have collapsed if at all only when the top reached the bottom not before they reached down there...

The bottom floors DID collapse in secession AFTER the top ones.  However.. unlike towers 1 and 2 where the weakest point was near the top... with tower 7... the weakest point was on the lower half where the fire had been the strongest (on the south side) which is why number 7 collapses and leans to the south side at this very point of weaness.

There are all sorts of evidence of pancaking below this weakened point.  the WTC columns laid out as if there were a path to the building. There are no concrete slabs attached to columns. This is yet another example of pancaking. With the floors pancaking straight down, the perimeter walls were free to lean over in tall sections before breaking off and coming down.  You can see this from the image below.

the tops should have toppled over from their own twisted off and bent weight... when their strength was undermined... go back and look at the aftermath of the empire state bldg. fire the charred ruins look like what i am suggesting the world trade center should have looked like as well... and the empire state bldg. fire raged much longer... check it out... nik.

The empire state building is MUCH stronger than the WTC which Al Queda had mentioned in their intelligence... and why they didnt go after it:

in 1945 the empire State Building when rammed by a B-25 in 1945. The plane, loaded with gasoline, hit between the seventy-eighth and seventy-ninth floors. The resultant fire burned for twenty-four hours and gutted five stories of the building. But the accident did not cause any catastrophic collapse of the structure because the tower had been built around a grid of interior columns and everyone had been clad in concrete.

This is COMPLETELY different than the WTC.

The WTC towers had a lightweight “perimeter tube” design consisting of 244 exterior columns of 36 cm square steel box section on 100 cm centers, with 95% of the structure’s interior consisting of nothing but air. 

This has been discussed in great detail.. and has caused government codes to change and not allow this type of perimeter tube skyscraper to be built.

[nikmatdam]

bry... i thought you brought this... so here it is... take a long hard look... n.

Delft University of Technology in Holland on fire and collapsing

[nikmatdam]

b.kibbutz brought it... bruciy take a new look... the bottom didn't fall out... nik.

[briann]

This is just sick the jihadis did it. I did not join the JTF to talk to wako conspiracy theorist.

I apologize for everyone that I am keeping this going by responding to Niks questions... but I have a reason for this. 

[AsheDina]

This is just sick the jihadis did it. I did not join the JTF to talk to wako conspiracy theorist.

I apologize for everyone that I am keeping this going by responding to Niks questions... but I have a reason for this. 

Briann- I said this about the Empire State building back like 7 pages ago.
ARE the rest of you bein MACHO SH*THEADS to me?







 

[briann]

This is just sick the jihadis did it. I did not join the JTF to talk to wako conspiracy theorist.

I apologize for everyone that I am keeping this going by responding to Niks questions... but I have a reason for this. 

Briann- I said this about the Empire State building back like 7 pages ago.
ARE the rest of you bein MACHO SH*THEADS to me?



 

Sorry Paulette.  I'm always trying to live up to you. 

[briann]

bry... i thought you brought this... so here it is... take a long hard look... n.

Delft University of Technology in Holland on fire and collapsing

Ohhh... why wasnt there pancaking at this fire?

I sorta already went over this... but just to elaborate.  Pancaking only happens when the weight above the collapse is significant enough to cause enough momentum to collapse the floors below it.. that HAVENT been damaged by fire.

This is gone over in detail in 9/11 modern marvels and popular mechanics...   But just to review... if the collapse happened on the 3rd to highest floor.... it wouldn't cause pancaking.  WHY???

because there are only the weight of 3 combined floors collapsing on the floor below it.

HOWEVER... if the collapse happens on the 30th or 40th to highest floor... then you have a much higher weight (30 floors collapsing)

NOW... regardless of WHAT floor the collapse happens at... the floors above the collapse are going to cave in when you pull the rug from under them... but this does NOT guarantee pancaking.  It only happens when total weight from the floors above the collapse is above a critical point.... and that depends upon how the building is constructed as well.

[nikmatdam]

again bry that building in holland is brick and/or cement... not steel... steel does not melt and does not fall... and who says the empire state bldg. was stronger...? true it has less glass... but it has more brick or cement and therefore should have collapsed as well bec. of it and bec. of the fact that it burned for much longer... and i don't want to hear about rocket ful being hotter than fire fire... reg. fire... the longer something burns the hotter it gets if it has enough kindling and/or fuel but rocket fuel burns up and dissipates in minutes and then what...? it's just a reg, fire like all other reg. fires... it is just preposterous to bel. it did all that damage... and what about the thievery from beneath the 2 towers... the gold bars and the truck left open and abandoned as one of the getaway vehicles was left behnd in plain site... why wouldn't it have been gone as well for nothing to see if it was a reg. rescue operation and not a hurried heist...? the whole thing is a crock of you know what and it stinks to high heaven... nik.

[briann]

bruciy take a new look... the bottom didn't fall out... nik.

Are you saying there wasnt pancaking below the point of collapse?

If you are... then... again.. thats why I posted that last picture.   Building 7 had the majority of its damage on around the 10th floor of a 47 story building.  Therefore the only way to see the pancaking was to examine the remains of the bottom 9 stories which just arent visible in the video.

Again.. the firefighters saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13 on the south side... and they commented that it would fall from there... and it did. It collapsed from that bulge... and then the area with the hole completely caved in above it... and the top 37 floors all caved in.. which is what you can see on the video...  after they caved in... the bottom 10 floors collapsed from the pancaking.  And when you examine the remains... you see clear signs of pancaking on the bottom 7 stories or so.

[AsheDina]

This is just sick the jihadis did it. I did not join the JTF to talk to wako conspiracy theorist.

I apologize for everyone that I am keeping this going by responding to Niks questions... but I have a reason for this. 

Briann- I said this about the Empire State building back like 7 pages ago.
ARE the rest of you bein MACHO SH*THEADS to me?



 

Sorry Paulette.  I'm always trying to live up to you. 

 Briann,
  I am a BAD actress, but a great singer- You are a Professor? I HARDLY think I even come close. I am just good at punch lines.




OK are you CRAZIES STILL up to to devil behind EVERY doorknob?    I will give the BEST story $50-. I have not seen ONE YET.

[muslimslayer0075995]

nik, i know for a fact that the terrorist attack was a terrorist attack, its possible, i mean why do u rely so much on the government being evil, think about it this way people make mistakes (in our case a pretty fricken huge one) i mean the odds are greater that it was a coincedence then a planned attack , if it was a planned attack how ia it poassible for so much explosives to be smuggled in without anyone realizing it, do u realoize how much explosives would be needed to blow up a building like that, plus how can bush hide his tracks so perfectly. think about it for a second. do this and please think about it

[briann]

again bry that building in holland is brick and/or cement... not steel... steel does not melt and does not fall... and who says the empire state bldg. was stronger... true it has less glass... but it has more brick or cement and therefore should have collapsed as well bec. of it and bec. of the fact that it burned for much longer...

Its not just me who thinks that the empire state building is MUCH stronger.  EVERY architect or engineer who is familar with it will attest to this.

Here is an excellent post on this subject from the Design and Architectural forums.

http://www.designcommunity.com/discussion/13977.html

Again.. you are right about the rocket fuel but I didnt even really talk about that.

. and what about the thievery from beneath the 2 towers... the gold bars and the truck left open and abandoned as one of the getaway vehicles was left behnd in plain site... why wouldn't it have been gone as well for nothing to see if it was a reg. rescue operation and not a hurried heist...

There is not a shred of proof.. ANYWHERE.. that the World Trade Center was stuffed with gold bars.  This is why the 9/11 truthers didnt even bring this up in their documentary.  Because it turned out to be a dead-end.

[briann]

This is just sick the jihadis did it. I did not join the JTF to talk to wako conspiracy theorist.

I apologize for everyone that I am keeping this going by responding to Niks questions... but I have a reason for this. 

Briann- I said this about the Empire State building back like 7 pages ago.
ARE the rest of you bein MACHO SH*THEADS to me?



 

Sorry Paulette.  I'm always trying to live up to you. 

 Briann,
  I am a BAD actress, but a great singer- You are a Professor? I HARDLY think I even come close. I am just good at punch lines.

OK are you CRAZIES STILL up to to devil behind EVERY doorknob?    I will give the BEST story $50-. I have not seen ONE YET.

I am from the 'evil' academic world... but I am not like  99% of the other liberal America Hating proffs at my school. 

And yes... I kinda want this discussion to continue till conclusion. (It may take a while.. but oh well) 

[briann]

again bry that building in holland is brick and/or cement... not steel... steel

Ooops.. .forgot to respond to this.

you are right... brick and cement are MUCH more likely to collapse than steel.

HOWEVER... that doesnt taken to account how weak steel can become when it is heated.

Brick and cement do NOT weaken when they are exposed to high temperatures.  Steel DOES.  This doesnt mean that steel isnt STRONGER... but it DOES mean that if and when there is a collapse in a steal building with a fire... the areas nearby the part collapsing will be much weaker than normal and would be much more likely to become part of a domino effect.



BTW... from everything I was reading.. I beleive that structure in Holland did have steel reinforcements.

[Muck DeFuslims]

nik, i know for a fact that the terrorist attack was a terrorist attack, its possible, i mean why do u rely so much on the government being evil, think about it this way people make mistakes (in our case a pretty fricken huge one) i mean the odds are greater that it was a coincedence then a planned attack , if it was a planned attack how ia it poassible for so much explosives to be smuggled in without anyone realizing it, do u realoize how much explosives would be needed to blow up a building like that, plus how can bush hide his tracks so perfectly. think about it for a second. do this and please think about it

Just in case you haven't realized it yet, you're attempting to deal rationally with an irrational person.

There's a reason Chaim was forced to suggest that nikmatdam leave this forum, and that reason is very apparent in this thread.

This arrogant ignoramus makes blanket statements like 'fire could never cause a building to collapse unless it's made of wood'.

Some of the posters here have patiently tried to deal with this ignoramus thinking that it's possible to persuade him through a logical presentation of evidence.

What a waste of time and an embarrassment to this great forum.

Now some of you might say or think "gee Muck, you're being really hard on nik, and calling him an ignoramus is uncalled for". Well I'm sorry, but there's just so much lunacy and stupidity one can be exposed to without brandishing a harsh response.

Paulette, you offered 50 dollars to the 'crazy' with the best story. Just mail the check to nik now.

Oh, and by the way nik, there's really no need to end everyone of your semi-literate, devoid of punctuation, rambling diatribes with the words 'nik out'. We can easily figure out who the post is from by looking at the name and avatar on your post and are capable of figuring out that you're done when you stop typing and spewing your lunacy.
 

[briann]

Some of the posters here have patiently tried to deal with this ignoramus thinking that it's possible to persuade him through a logical presentation of evidence.

What a waste of time and an embarrassment to this great forum.

I actually NEVER respond to conspiracy theorists...  I typically just like to make fun of them.

However.. Ive made an exception in this case...  more for lubab than for Nik.

[nikmatdam]

and of course naturally since you're all talking with a certifiable nut-case... that makes you extremely intelligent and perfectly sane... correct...? as gore vidal that stinker once said... (truth wherever it comes from must be accepted)... "naturally the u.s. is the only nation in the history of the world that has never ever had a conspiracy within its governmental ranks... and the lone-nut theory each and every time is exactly what transpired... of course..."  (which in the case of 9/11 is the first multiple lone nut case in u.s.history... of arab-islamo-fascist nuts... 19 of them)... lincoln of course had 11 nuts hung for killing him... but booth goes down as a lone nut... and then much later on... 100 yrs. later by jfk, rfk and mlk... there weren't any 11 collaborators in any of those slayings... give me a break... listen i've got beachfront property in arizona i'd like to sell you guys... real cheap... nik. and there's a method to my madness of signing out this way... bec. this way i know later on that my posts were not tampered with... or doctored in any fashion... as i almost never say a word after... OUT!!!

[AsheDina]

nik, i know for a fact that the terrorist attack was a terrorist attack, its possible, i mean why do u rely so much on the government being evil, think about it this way people make mistakes (in our case a pretty fricken huge one) i mean the odds are greater that it was a coincedence then a planned attack , if it was a planned attack how ia it poassible for so much explosives to be smuggled in without anyone realizing it, do u realoize how much explosives would be needed to blow up a building like that, plus how can bush hide his tracks so perfectly. think about it for a second. do this and please think about it

Just in case you haven't realized it yet, you're attempting to deal rationally with an irrational person.

There's a reason Chaim was forced to suggest that nikmatdam leave this forum, and that reason is very apparent in this thread.

This arrogant ignoramus makes blanket statements like 'fire could never cause a building to collapse unless it's made of wood'.

Some of the posters here have patiently tried to deal with this ignoramus thinking that it's possible to persuade him through a logical presentation of evidence.

What a waste of time and an embarrassment to this great forum.

Now some of you might say or think "gee Muck, you're being really hard on nik, and calling him an ignoramus is uncalled for". Well I'm sorry, but there's just so much lunacy and stupidity one can be exposed to without brandishing a harsh response.

Paulette, you offered 50 dollars to the 'crazy' with the best story. Just mail the check to nik now.

Oh, and by the way nik, there's really no need to end everyone of your semi-literate, devoid of punctuation, rambling diatribes with the words 'nik out'. We can easily figure out who the post is from by looking at the name and avatar on your post and are capable of figuring out that you're done when you stop typing and spewing your lunacy.
 

 Well, Muck-the person WINNING this debate IS Briann.  I am not into bans- it makes a forum LOUSY. I have actually cut back all paltalk time, b/c it is MUCH more exciting here- even David- who HATES how forums operate, cant take his eyes off this forum as well. I dont know where the $50- is going yet, its still a toss up.  Clearly the BEST winner will be the best person with the best story fit for the hollywood of today, that LIVES to PRETEND that 9-11 was a HOAX.

[briann]

and of course naturally since you're all talking with a certifiable nut-case... that makes you extremely intelligent and perfectly sane... correct...? as gore vidal that stinker once said... (truth wherever it comes from must be accepted)... "naturally the u.s. is the only nation in the history of the world that has never ever had a conspiracy within its governmental ranks... and the lone-nut theory each and every time is exactly what transpired... of course..."  (which in the case of 9/11 is the first multiple lone nut case in u.s.history... of arab-islamo-fascist nuts... 19 of them)... lincoln of course had 11 nuts hung for killing him... but booth goes down as a lone nut... and then much later on... 100 yrs. later by jfk, rfk and mlk... there weren't any 11 collaborators in any of those slayings... give me a break... listen i've got beachfront property in arizona i'd like to sell you guys... real cheap... nik. and there's a method to my madness of signing out this way... bec. this way i know later on that my posts were not tampered with... or doctored in any fashion... as i almost never say a word after... OUT!!!

Well Nik.  I want you to know that I never had any intentions of trying to convince you of anything.  I think I would have better luck teaching a cat how to swim.

However... If you ever are interested to see things a bit differently, from my perspective, go to a Muslim website or StørmFrønt... and try to convince the people that the Hollocaust ISNT a conspiracy.  You will find that NO MATTER what you say to them... they will NEVER beleive you.

I actually used to do this a lot when I was younger.   They would always bring up the same old garbage, and I would argue and argue..... and bring up fact after fact... and they would always say that the evidence I was giving was forged or faked or from a zionist source... or they just wouldnt respond.. and would ignore my posts.  That's why I dont argue anymore with Conspiracy Theorists... because I know that they will NEVER change their mind. 

But with Lubab... I could sence that there was a LITTLE bit of doubt.  (Not much... but a little).  So thats why I broke from my old habbits and tried to answer all his questions... to see if I was wrong about my presumptions.  I have no idea if it worked... but we'll see.

Rest assured.. from here on out... I will be back to my same old self.. of ridiculing all conspiracies.  And that of course includes vatican conspiracies, moon landing conspiracies, JFK conspiracies, and whatever you can throw at me... SOOO.. .Keep em coming!!!!

[briann]

nik, i know for a fact that the terrorist attack was a terrorist attack, its possible, i mean why do u rely so much on the government being evil, think about it this way people make mistakes (in our case a pretty fricken huge one) i mean the odds are greater that it was a coincedence then a planned attack , if it was a planned attack how ia it poassible for so much explosives to be smuggled in without anyone realizing it, do u realoize how much explosives would be needed to blow up a building like that, plus how can bush hide his tracks so perfectly. think about it for a second. do this and please think about it

Just in case you haven't realized it yet, you're attempting to deal rationally with an irrational person.

There's a reason Chaim was forced to suggest that nikmatdam leave this forum, and that reason is very apparent in this thread.

This arrogant ignoramus makes blanket statements like 'fire could never cause a building to collapse unless it's made of wood'.

Some of the posters here have patiently tried to deal with this ignoramus thinking that it's possible to persuade him through a logical presentation of evidence.

What a waste of time and an embarrassment to this great forum.

Now some of you might say or think "gee Muck, you're being really hard on nik, and calling him an ignoramus is uncalled for". Well I'm sorry, but there's just so much lunacy and stupidity one can be exposed to without brandishing a harsh response.

Paulette, you offered 50 dollars to the 'crazy' with the best story. Just mail the check to nik now.

Oh, and by the way nik, there's really no need to end everyone of your semi-literate, devoid of punctuation, rambling diatribes with the words 'nik out'. We can easily figure out who the post is from by looking at the name and avatar on your post and are capable of figuring out that you're done when you stop typing and spewing your lunacy.
 

 Well, Muck-the person WINNING this debate IS Briann.  I am not into bans- it makes a forum LOUSY. I have actually cut back all paltalk time, b/c it is MUCH more exciting here- even David- who HATES how forums operate, cant take his eyes off this forum as well. I dont know where the $50- is going yet, its still a toss up.  Clearly the BEST winner will be the best person with the best story fit for the hollywood of today, that LIVES to PRETEND that 9-11 was a HOAX.

wOO HOOO!!!!   You like me!!!!  YOU REALLY LIKE ME!!! 

I would like to thank my agent and my hairstylist.

[Lubab]

I think this is a fantastic debate.

I would love to see similar debates on the other 7 questions, but I don't know if I'll get my wish.

I'd be very curious to hear Brian's thoughts on why Bush didn't run for cover when he learned of the attacks and why they were doing drills to prevent the exact same attack on the same morning of the drills (odd or a gazillion to one). But by all means let's let this debate run its course before we go on to other matters.