Toronto Hearings

wihosa

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
180
Points
130
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
 

Jarhead

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2010
Messages
20,670
Reaction score
2,378
Points
245
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
So, they are a group...with an agenda.....gee......that makes them credible.

LOL...there are 100 times as many successful and accredited Architects and Engineers that agree that the collapse was quite feasible in light of the intense heat created by jet fuel fires.

Seems like another Al Gore situation to me.
 
OP
W

wihosa

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
180
Points
130
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
So, they are a group...with an agenda.....gee......that makes them credible.

LOL...there are 100 times as many successful and accredited Architects and Engineers that agree that the collapse was quite feasible in light of the intense heat created by jet fuel fires.

Seems like another Al Gore situation to me.
OK, it is obvious that you have never bothered to research anything about this. Jet fuel, even in large quantities can't generate the heat required to melt steel. There were numerous reports from first responders of molten steel "like it was a foundery", "like lava"in the bottom of the debris days after the event.

If you are sure that 100 times (that would be 150,000) as many architects and engineers believe that an office fire or even a fire caused by jet fuel could cause a modern steel frame sky scraper to collapse at free fall speeds, then why don't you present that evidence.

I refer you to the A & E 911 Truth web site. Mind you, that besides architects and engineers they also have the testimony of PHD's of many disciplines and the testimony of controlled demolition experts.

At any rate I didn't intend to argue with those that won't open their eyes or minds. This post is intended to inform people of the up coming hearings. Those who want to check the facts before they check their political bent will give look.
 

WillowTree

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
84,438
Reaction score
15,917
Points
2,180
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
Fuck toronto and it's phucking hearings. you belong in the conspiracy theory you phucking moron.
 
OP
W

wihosa

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
180
Points
130
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
Fuck toronto and it's phucking hearings. you belong in the conspiracy theory you phucking moron.
Well, there is a well reasoned rebuttal! Why don't you just proclaim that you are an ignorant moron and you couldn't tell a fact from fiction if it hit you in the head.
 

Jarhead

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2010
Messages
20,670
Reaction score
2,378
Points
245
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
So, they are a group...with an agenda.....gee......that makes them credible.

LOL...there are 100 times as many successful and accredited Architects and Engineers that agree that the collapse was quite feasible in light of the intense heat created by jet fuel fires.

Seems like another Al Gore situation to me.
OK, it is obvious that you have never bothered to research anything about this. Jet fuel, even in large quantities can't generate the heat required to melt steel. There were numerous reports from first responders of molten steel "like it was a foundery", "like lava"in the bottom of the debris days after the event.

If you are sure that 100 times (that would be 150,000) as many architects and engineers believe that an office fire or even a fire caused by jet fuel could cause a modern steel frame sky scraper to collapse at free fall speeds, then why don't you present that evidence. I refer you to the A & E 911 Truth web site. Mind you, that besides architects and engineers they also have the testimony of PHD's of many disciplines and the testimony of controlled demolition experts.

At any rate I didn't intend to argue with those that won't open their eyes or minds. This post is intended to inform people of the up coming hearings. Those who want to check the facts before they check their political bent will give look.
the evidence was presented.
There was a documentary on it with very compelling evidence AND actual scale examples.
You know very little about steel AND jet fuel if you beleive a fire of such heat will not compromise the inegrity of the steel itself.

You are aware, I am sure, that the I-Beams are not mined and come out of the earth in that shape. They are MOLDED into that shape with...yep...you got it...intense heat.

Now, the heat was so intense, that it was seen that people...who were not directly in the face of the flame....jumped to their deaths as their skin was buring off their bones...not from the firebut from the intense heat.

In the meantime, men and women work in a mill with the heat to mold steel....literally FEET from the heat....so I have good logical reason to believe that if a man can withstand the heat strong enough to melt steel....and men jumpoed to their deaths due to the heat of the fire...then that heat MUST have been greater than the heat normally used to mold steele.

Now, you couple with that the IMMENSE weight of the structure ABOVE the steele that has been compromised, and you have exactly what we saw...a collapse.

And finally...and this is important...

The surface area of each individual floor was so vast, that the weight was distributed pretty equally...so when one corner started to collpase, it allowed all four corners to collapse together....resulting in the pancake collapse.

You should watch the documentary.....it may help you sl;eep better at night.
 

Claudette

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
38,908
Reaction score
9,212
Points
1,330
So, they are a group...with an agenda.....gee......that makes them credible.

LOL...there are 100 times as many successful and accredited Architects and Engineers that agree that the collapse was quite feasible in light of the intense heat created by jet fuel fires.

Seems like another Al Gore situation to me.
OK, it is obvious that you have never bothered to research anything about this. Jet fuel, even in large quantities can't generate the heat required to melt steel. There were numerous reports from first responders of molten steel "like it was a foundery", "like lava"in the bottom of the debris days after the event.

If you are sure that 100 times (that would be 150,000) as many architects and engineers believe that an office fire or even a fire caused by jet fuel could cause a modern steel frame sky scraper to collapse at free fall speeds, then why don't you present that evidence. I refer you to the A & E 911 Truth web site. Mind you, that besides architects and engineers they also have the testimony of PHD's of many disciplines and the testimony of controlled demolition experts.

At any rate I didn't intend to argue with those that won't open their eyes or minds. This post is intended to inform people of the up coming hearings. Those who want to check the facts before they check their political bent will give look.
the evidence was presented.
There was a documentary on it with very compelling evidence AND actual scale examples.
You know very little about steel AND jet fuel if you beleive a fire of such heat will not compromise the inegrity of the steel itself.

You are aware, I am sure, that the I-Beams are not mined and come out of the earth in that shape. They are MOLDED into that shape with...yep...you got it...intense heat.

Now, the heat was so intense, that it was seen that people...who were not directly in the face of the flame....jumped to their deaths as their skin was buring off their bones...not from the firebut from the intense heat.

In the meantime, men and women work in a mill with the heat to mold steel....literally FEET from the heat....so I have good logical reason to believe that if a man can withstand the heat strong enough to melt steel....and men jumpoed to their deaths due to the heat of the fire...then that heat MUST have been greater than the heat normally used to mold steele.

Now, you couple with that the IMMENSE weight of the structure ABOVE the steele that has been compromised, and you have exactly what we saw...a collapse.

And finally...and this is important...

The surface area of each individual floor was so vast, that the weight was distributed pretty equally...so when one corner started to collpase, it allowed all four corners to collapse together....resulting in the pancake collapse.

You should watch the documentary.....it may help you sl;eep better at night.
Saw it and your dead on.

That documentary pretty much blew all that conspiracy bs, point for point, right out of the water.
 

Jarhead

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2010
Messages
20,670
Reaction score
2,378
Points
245
OK, it is obvious that you have never bothered to research anything about this. Jet fuel, even in large quantities can't generate the heat required to melt steel. There were numerous reports from first responders of molten steel "like it was a foundery", "like lava"in the bottom of the debris days after the event.

If you are sure that 100 times (that would be 150,000) as many architects and engineers believe that an office fire or even a fire caused by jet fuel could cause a modern steel frame sky scraper to collapse at free fall speeds, then why don't you present that evidence. I refer you to the A & E 911 Truth web site. Mind you, that besides architects and engineers they also have the testimony of PHD's of many disciplines and the testimony of controlled demolition experts.

At any rate I didn't intend to argue with those that won't open their eyes or minds. This post is intended to inform people of the up coming hearings. Those who want to check the facts before they check their political bent will give look.
the evidence was presented.
There was a documentary on it with very compelling evidence AND actual scale examples.
You know very little about steel AND jet fuel if you beleive a fire of such heat will not compromise the inegrity of the steel itself.

You are aware, I am sure, that the I-Beams are not mined and come out of the earth in that shape. They are MOLDED into that shape with...yep...you got it...intense heat.

Now, the heat was so intense, that it was seen that people...who were not directly in the face of the flame....jumped to their deaths as their skin was buring off their bones...not from the firebut from the intense heat.

In the meantime, men and women work in a mill with the heat to mold steel....literally FEET from the heat....so I have good logical reason to believe that if a man can withstand the heat strong enough to melt steel....and men jumpoed to their deaths due to the heat of the fire...then that heat MUST have been greater than the heat normally used to mold steele.

Now, you couple with that the IMMENSE weight of the structure ABOVE the steele that has been compromised, and you have exactly what we saw...a collapse.

And finally...and this is important...

The surface area of each individual floor was so vast, that the weight was distributed pretty equally...so when one corner started to collpase, it allowed all four corners to collapse together....resulting in the pancake collapse.

You should watch the documentary.....it may help you sl;eep better at night.
Saw it and your dead on.

That documentary pretty much blew all that conspiracy bs, point for point, right out of the water.
Hey...I spent September 12th from 6 AM to sept 14th at 12 noon down there....R and R...well it started as rescue and recovery but by friday it was really just recovery.
Lots of dust, rebar, and clkoth.....and paper everywhere...I was knee deep in wet paper..
Spent much of the time moving the cars and trucks out of the way of building 7 so they could put the fire out. If you recall, they couldnt get to the fire in taht building becuase of all of the cars and fire trucks that were destroyed by the heat and falling debris....

Claudette...it was a war zone down there....I will never forget the smell.
 

MiddleClass

Moderate American
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
362
Reaction score
81
Points
28
Location
Delaware
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
Fuck toronto and it's phucking hearings. you belong in the conspiracy theory you phucking moron.
Talk about having an awful lot of paint for their big black kettle - moronic is as moronic writes:eusa_eh:
 

Claudette

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
38,908
Reaction score
9,212
Points
1,330
the evidence was presented.
There was a documentary on it with very compelling evidence AND actual scale examples.
You know very little about steel AND jet fuel if you beleive a fire of such heat will not compromise the inegrity of the steel itself.

You are aware, I am sure, that the I-Beams are not mined and come out of the earth in that shape. They are MOLDED into that shape with...yep...you got it...intense heat.

Now, the heat was so intense, that it was seen that people...who were not directly in the face of the flame....jumped to their deaths as their skin was buring off their bones...not from the firebut from the intense heat.

In the meantime, men and women work in a mill with the heat to mold steel....literally FEET from the heat....so I have good logical reason to believe that if a man can withstand the heat strong enough to melt steel....and men jumpoed to their deaths due to the heat of the fire...then that heat MUST have been greater than the heat normally used to mold steele.

Now, you couple with that the IMMENSE weight of the structure ABOVE the steele that has been compromised, and you have exactly what we saw...a collapse.

And finally...and this is important...

The surface area of each individual floor was so vast, that the weight was distributed pretty equally...so when one corner started to collpase, it allowed all four corners to collapse together....resulting in the pancake collapse.

You should watch the documentary.....it may help you sl;eep better at night.
Saw it and your dead on.

That documentary pretty much blew all that conspiracy bs, point for point, right out of the water.
Hey...I spent September 12th from 6 AM to sept 14th at 12 noon down there....R and R...well it started as rescue and recovery but by friday it was really just recovery.
Lots of dust, rebar, and clkoth.....and paper everywhere...I was knee deep in wet paper..
Spent much of the time moving the cars and trucks out of the way of building 7 so they could put the fire out. If you recall, they couldnt get to the fire in taht building becuase of all of the cars and fire trucks that were destroyed by the heat and falling debris....

Claudette...it was a war zone down there....I will never forget the smell.
I wasn't there JH but watched as it happened on TV.

Jesus. All those people throwing themselves out of the Towers. The media showed the first couple but wouldn't show any more once they realized what they were actually seeing. My God. The people that burned to death in those Towers.

And the debris and wrecked everything once the Towers fell. Jesus.

War Zone. Yup. I can see why you call it that.
 
Last edited:
OP
W

wihosa

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
180
Points
130
I'm sure being in the middle of the 9-11 disaster was like being in a war zone. Being an eyewitness doesn't impart some ability to deserne impirical truth.
Science does.

Jarhead thinks he knows something about structural engineering because, well because he does.

I am a general building contractor, mostly residential construction, but I have installed a few structural steel beams and columns in my day. I've spoken with structural engineers and many iron workers. I haven't met one yet that believes that all the structural column/beam connections in Building 7 failed within miliseconds of each other in perfect sycronistity from floor to floor (what is required to make a building collapse into it's own footprint) as a result of an office fire. They all agree that it is an impossibility.
I've asked at least two structural engineers why they don't join A & E for 911 Truth an both told me they are afraid it would hurt their business, afraid they would be called conspiracy theorists. But they both told me catagorically that modern steel frame office towers can not collapse due to fire.

I challange any of you who think this can happen to find a strutural engineer (who is not already a 911 conspiracy denier) who will say that modern stell frame office towers can collapse into their own footprint due to fire.
 

Rat in the Hat

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
21,949
Reaction score
6,018
Points
198
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
Will they use these hearings to gather up all their evidence, take it into a courtroom, and start getting convictions on the "perps"?
 

WillowTree

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
84,438
Reaction score
15,917
Points
2,180
"you cannot melt steel with fire" who was the dumb ass who said that?



wasn't it that retarded Rosie O'Donnell.. is she going to toronto.. pronto?
 

Jarhead

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2010
Messages
20,670
Reaction score
2,378
Points
245
I'm sure being in the middle of the 9-11 disaster was like being in a war zone. Being an eyewitness doesn't impart some ability to deserne impirical truth.
Science does.

Jarhead thinks he knows something about structural engineering because, well because he does.

I am a general building contractor, mostly residential construction, but I have installed a few structural steel beams and columns in my day. I've spoken with structural engineers and many iron workers. I haven't met one yet that believes that all the structural column/beam connections in Building 7 failed within miliseconds of each other in perfect sycronistity from floor to floor (what is required to make a building collapse into it's own footprint) as a result of an office fire. They all agree that it is an impossibility.
I've asked at least two structural engineers why they don't join A & E for 911 Truth an both told me they are afraid it would hurt their business, afraid they would be called conspiracy theorists. But they both told me catagorically that modern steel frame office towers can not collapse due to fire.

I challange any of you who think this can happen to find a strutural engineer (who is not already a 911 conspiracy denier) who will say that modern stell frame office towers can collapse into their own footprint due to fire.
I think I know something becuase I watched a documentary explaining how such was possible. I am and have always been a student...I dont watch basic TV...I watch science shows and documentaries...news and sports....

Likewise, I applied my own logic and realized that the heat of the fire was greater than the heat that is used to melt steel commerically.

I also understood the physics as it pertained to the collapse..and why the pancake affect was not only possible...but very likely.

You and I dont need to see eye to eye on this....but do I warrant your ridicule? Am I ridiculing you?

I would like to point out an interesting request you made....

I challange any of you who think this can happen to find a strutural engineer (who is not already a 911 conspiracy denier)

The words in bold...

What is wrong with a structural engineer who has reviewed the scenario and has determined that such is possible?

So you are convinced there is some sort of conspiracy based on the information offered by structural engineers that are truthers (but not outspoken for privacy reasons), but those that are structural engineers that are deniers are not worthy of similar respect?

Do you not see the bias?
 
OP
W

wihosa

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
180
Points
130
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
Will they use these hearings to gather up all their evidence, take it into a courtroom, and start getting convictions on the "perps"?
This is the hope, that as more and more people find out about this that there will be the imputus to begin a real investigation by a prosecutor armed with subpoena power.
 

Rat in the Hat

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
21,949
Reaction score
6,018
Points
198
The tenth anniversary of 9-11 is upon us and during this time there will be the Toronto Hearings (in Toronto Canada), a 4 day examination of the facts and inconsistancies of the original "investigation".

Remember that the 9-11 Commission did not have subpoena power and so all "testimony" is suspect. Many of the conclusions of the 9-11 Commission are preposterous, such as the conclussion that Building 7 collapsed completly into it's own footprint due to a moderate office fire which is considered "an impossabilty" by structural engineers represented by an orginization called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth (they are a growing orginization of over 1500 registered architects and structural engineers).

The US media has consistently avoided this topic because of the obvious implications, but the Toronto Hearings will be live on the web.

We have been living a National Lie for the past ten years, now is the time for truth. Stay tuned in.
Will they use these hearings to gather up all their evidence, take it into a courtroom, and start getting convictions on the "perps"?
This is the hope, that as more and more people find out about this that there will be the imputus to begin a real investigation by a prosecutor armed with subpoena power.
Then they are going to spend 4 days JAQing around, instead of getting justice for the victims.
 
OP
W

wihosa

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
1,726
Reaction score
180
Points
130
I'm sure being in the middle of the 9-11 disaster was like being in a war zone. Being an eyewitness doesn't impart some ability to deserne impirical truth.
Science does.

Jarhead thinks he knows something about structural engineering because, well because he does.

I am a general building contractor, mostly residential construction, but I have installed a few structural steel beams and columns in my day. I've spoken with structural engineers and many iron workers. I haven't met one yet that believes that all the structural column/beam connections in Building 7 failed within miliseconds of each other in perfect sycronistity from floor to floor (what is required to make a building collapse into it's own footprint) as a result of an office fire. They all agree that it is an impossibility.
I've asked at least two structural engineers why they don't join A & E for 911 Truth an both told me they are afraid it would hurt their business, afraid they would be called conspiracy theorists. But they both told me catagorically that modern steel frame office towers can not collapse due to fire.

I challange any of you who think this can happen to find a strutural engineer (who is not already a 911 conspiracy denier) who will say that modern stell frame office towers can collapse into their own footprint due to fire.
I think I know something becuase I watched a documentary explaining how such was possible. I am and have always been a student...I dont watch basic TV...I watch science shows and documentaries...news and sports....

Likewise, I applied my own logic and realized that the heat of the fire was greater than the heat that is used to melt steel commerically.

I also understood the physics as it pertained to the collapse..and why the pancake affect was not only possible...but very likely.

You and I dont need to see eye to eye on this....but do I warrant your ridicule? Am I ridiculing you?

I would like to point out an interesting request you made....

I challange any of you who think this can happen to find a strutural engineer (who is not already a 911 conspiracy denier)

The words in bold...

What is wrong with a structural engineer who has reviewed the scenario and has determined that such is possible?

So you are convinced there is some sort of conspiracy based on the information offered by structural engineers that are truthers (but not outspoken for privacy reasons), but those that are structural engineers that are deniers are not worthy of similar respect?

Do you not see the bias?
Why ridicule? Hers's a quote from your first reply "So, they are a group...with an agenda.....gee......that makes them credible.

LOL...there are 100 times as many successful and accredited Architects and Engineers that agree that the collapse was quite feasible in light of the intense heat created by jet fuel fires.

Seems like another Al Gore situation to me"
That's not ridicule?

As for your 'logic' that because people can work in a foundery where the heat is so intense that it can melt steel and that people exposed to the fire in the towers jumped because they were overpowered by the heat, that therefore it means that the heat in the towers was sufficient to melt steel (mind you melt, molten, is the operative word) is nonsense. Do a little research and you will find that hydrocarbon fires, those composed of hydrocarbon based fuels such as wood, paper, synthetic fibers like carpet, etc. cannot reach the temperatures needed to melt steel which is at least 2500F degrees. Hydrocarbon fires cannot exceed about 1500F degrees without adding compressed air or pure oxygen.

As for the "pancake theory", where did all the pancaked floors go? There were no floors stacked up at the bottom.

Why exclude those who are already convinced that it was an accident? Haven't they also shown their bias (I would say complicity)?

The only reason that this has gone on so long is those like you who are only too ready to ridicule those who say there was a conspiracy, in fact the perpetrators of 9-11 were counting on those like you to cover their tracks.

Boil it done and the fact remains that modern steel frame office towers can not collapse imto their own footprints due only to fire. It is an impossibility, yet Building 7 did just that more than six hours after the twin towers went down.

A lucky strike by Al-Queda, or very careful planning?
 

Jarhead

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2010
Messages
20,670
Reaction score
2,378
Points
245
I'm sure being in the middle of the 9-11 disaster was like being in a war zone. Being an eyewitness doesn't impart some ability to deserne impirical truth.
Science does.

Jarhead thinks he knows something about structural engineering because, well because he does.

I am a general building contractor, mostly residential construction, but I have installed a few structural steel beams and columns in my day. I've spoken with structural engineers and many iron workers. I haven't met one yet that believes that all the structural column/beam connections in Building 7 failed within miliseconds of each other in perfect sycronistity from floor to floor (what is required to make a building collapse into it's own footprint) as a result of an office fire. They all agree that it is an impossibility.
I've asked at least two structural engineers why they don't join A & E for 911 Truth an both told me they are afraid it would hurt their business, afraid they would be called conspiracy theorists. But they both told me catagorically that modern steel frame office towers can not collapse due to fire.

I challange any of you who think this can happen to find a strutural engineer (who is not already a 911 conspiracy denier) who will say that modern stell frame office towers can collapse into their own footprint due to fire.
I think I know something becuase I watched a documentary explaining how such was possible. I am and have always been a student...I dont watch basic TV...I watch science shows and documentaries...news and sports....

Likewise, I applied my own logic and realized that the heat of the fire was greater than the heat that is used to melt steel commerically.

I also understood the physics as it pertained to the collapse..and why the pancake affect was not only possible...but very likely.

You and I dont need to see eye to eye on this....but do I warrant your ridicule? Am I ridiculing you?

I would like to point out an interesting request you made....

I challange any of you who think this can happen to find a strutural engineer (who is not already a 911 conspiracy denier)

The words in bold...

What is wrong with a structural engineer who has reviewed the scenario and has determined that such is possible?

So you are convinced there is some sort of conspiracy based on the information offered by structural engineers that are truthers (but not outspoken for privacy reasons), but those that are structural engineers that are deniers are not worthy of similar respect?

Do you not see the bias?
Why ridicule? Hers's a quote from your first reply "So, they are a group...with an agenda.....gee......that makes them credible.

LOL...there are 100 times as many successful and accredited Architects and Engineers that agree that the collapse was quite feasible in light of the intense heat created by jet fuel fires.

Seems like another Al Gore situation to me"
That's not ridicule?

As for your 'logic' that because people can work in a foundery where the heat is so intense that it can melt steel and that people exposed to the fire in the towers jumped because they were overpowered by the heat, that therefore it means that the heat in the towers was sufficient to melt steel (mind you melt, molten, is the operative word) is nonsense. Do a little research and you will find that hydrocarbon fires, those composed of hydrocarbon based fuels such as wood, paper, synthetic fibers like carpet, etc. cannot reach the temperatures needed to melt steel which is at least 2500F degrees. Hydrocarbon fires cannot exceed about 1500F degrees without adding compressed air or pure oxygen.

As for the "pancake theory", where did all the pancaked floors go? There were no floors stacked up at the bottom.

Why exclude those who are already convinced that it was an accident? Haven't they also shown their bias (I would say complicity)?

The only reason that this has gone on so long is those like you who are only too ready to ridicule those who say there was a conspiracy, in fact the perpetrators of 9-11 were counting on those like you to cover their tracks.

Boil it done and the fact remains that modern steel frame office towers can not collapse imto their own footprints due only to fire. It is an impossibility, yet Building 7 did just that more than six hours after the twin towers went down.

A lucky strike by Al-Queda, or very careful planning?
putting aside all of the stuff you just said, I need to ask you what you meant by one thing...

you asked...

Where did all the floors go?

What do you mean by that? Are you saying that it never really pancaked?

I ask as I was there....it was quite apparent where all the floors went...not sure why you say there were none at the bottom...the pile was seven stories high...why do you think there were no bodies? They were crushed...pulverized.....by the pancaking floors.

But I really need to know what you meant by "where did all the floors go"

Are you saying the buildings never went dfown? The did go down, but not pancake style?

I dont get it.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top