9-11, conspiracy, silly thread made by me. Whoop whoop.

[TopHat]

Have any of you seen Zeitgeist? Watch it.--MINOR LANGUAGE SCATTERED THROUGHOUT MOVIE-- zeitgeistmovie.com . All will be clear. Go to about 40 minutes into the movie.


It doesn't add up. None of the reasons the US Gov't adds up. A plane impact wouldn't be enough to bring down WTC 1 and 2, and there are witnesses that say there were several explosions in the basement of WTC 1 and 2, and characteristics of Thermite, which goes through steel like some celebs go through marriages. What about 7? It looked exactly like a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION, kink and all. No steel building ever collapsed from fire before, or after. Most of this has been paraphrased from the documentary.


So I'm gonna get flamed. Maybe banned for being crazy. But it's a little odd, don't you think? Nothing is as it seems. This is the mother of all conspiracies.


EDIT: Watch the entire thing, and it will show you that the panic of 1907 started the control of banks of our nation.

 

[V1P3R]

It's gonna sound cold but, yeah... how long has it been? how many times has this been talked about? Anyway, America needs to look at how the world sees them and realize we are not 1337... Finally, everyone knows it was because of Bush or part of his plan to make himself look good gone a bit off in the results.

 

[Solid Lifters]

Not this crap again...

 

[TopHat]

Not this crap again...

Just watch the movie.

 

[Joey D]

I'm always down for a good conspiracy theory (JFK assassination, moon landing, government hiding aliens) but I just don't know about 9/11. Conspiracy theories never have a bunch of creditability and even I will admit they only pick out the information that supports their theory while ignoring other information. I'm sure there would be more creditable if there was more truth to this, interesting idea but I wouldn't think to much into it.

 

[Kylehnat]

OMFG, why is this being posted again?

 

[TopHat]

It's kinda more than just sept eleventh. It's everything. That's ever happened that is bad since 1907.

 

[GrumpEone]

Have any of you seen Zeitgeist? Watch it.--MINOR LANGUAGE SCATTERED THROUGHOUT MOVIE-- zeitgeistmovie.com . All will be clear. Go to about 40 minutes into the movie.


It doesn't add up. None of the reasons the US Gov't adds up. A plane impact wouldn't be enough to bring down WTC 1 and 2, and there are witnesses that say there were several explosions in the basement of WTC 1 and 2, and characteristics of Thermite, which goes through steel like some celebs go through marriages. What about 7? It looked exactly like a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION, kink and all. No steel building ever collapsed from fire before, or after. Most of this has been paraphrased from the documentary.


So I'm gonna get flamed. Maybe banned for being crazy. But it's a little odd, don't you think? Nothing is as it seems.

The reason that the towers came down was, because of the fully Fueled planes that hit them. The Burning Fuel provided enough heat to weaken the Steel enough to cause them to warp. After the steel warps, the structure is no longer stable enough to hold up the building, and then the floors collapse.

Steel though extremely strong, when it is exposed to the intense heat, it loses the majority of it's strength.

Who was in the basement of the towers to 'witness' these explosions, and how the hell did they get out?? Anyway, there quite possibly were explosions at the foundation level by pressure, not thermite. As the upper floors, start losing stability from the steel warpage (from burning Jet Fuel), what is going to support all that extra weight? The foundation; what happens when all that extra weight is forced upon the foundation? The foundation supports blow-out, and the building collapses upon itself. (that the cliff-notes version)

 

[TopHat]

*this post*

The steel was molten at temperatures that exceed that of burning jet fuel. You notice how the floors collapsed upon themselves? Where are the core beams? THEY SHOULD BE STICKING UP A FIFTH OF A MILE IN THE SKY. Why was there molten steel under WTC Seven? Why did it collapse in such a controlled manner?

Why aren't any of you actually watching the movie? Maybe you should watch it, and then comment!

 

[Joey D]

It's a two hour long movie and I really can not be bothered with it since it's so far out there. One thing that I have never personally heard addressed was that maybe the WTC was improperly constructed.

 

[TopHat]

If you really want to see why I'm so damn crazy, and why I think this, watch the movie.

 

[V1P3R]

One thing that I have never personally heard addressed was that maybe the WTC was improperly constructed.

Uh... how old is it erm... was it? I bet it's older than both of us put together.

 

[JCE]

Give me a break. Fire can melt steel...that's how metals are formed into shapes ladies and gents...INTENSE HEAT AND FIRE. Honestly, this is some left-wing lunacy that needs to just go away. Someone pass the kool-aid?

 

[Joey D]

Uh... how old is it erm... was it? I bet it's older than both of us put together.

It was completed in 1973 so it's not very old, but that isn't my point, things can be built incorrectly no matter what time period it is.

 

[TopHat]

It was completed in 1973 so it's not very old, but that isn't my point, things can be built incorrectly no matter what time period it is.

It was designed to take multiple impacts from the largest jets of the time. Multiple ones. Once again. Watcheth the movie and the light will click on.

Also, certain types of steel melts at different points, so I think they'd go for a pretty damn high strength steel.

 

[Joey D]

I don't have two hours to watch a movie like that, it would be like forcing someone to watch a Micheal Moore film...shutters. Just because something was said to have been designed to take on an impact like that and survive does not mean anything, the Titanic was said to be unsinkable.

 

[TopHat]

The Titanic was flawed from the get-go. Many stupid decisions were made then. And people knew it.

 

[Joey D]

A building can not have the same flaws? Look I'm not saying that it was poorly constructed, I'm just saying that could be a possibility that needs to be looked at. Remember all these things are being built by the lowest bidder who works their employees the hardest and fastest in order to make a huge project end bonus. Mistakes and shortcuts are going to happen.

 

[Sage]

We’ve already been over this.

[edit]: I didn’t realize that the movie was about other stuff, so I’ll reopen the thread. But I would urge anybody who thinks 9/11 is a conspiracy to read Duke’s post from the Loose Change thread.

 

[Shannon]

It was designed to take multiple impacts from the largest jets of the time. Multiple ones. Once again. Watcheth the movie and the light will click on.

Yes, but it was designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707. It got hit by the larger 747s.

And even if a building was designed to take the impact of a plane, I know I wouldn't trust the engineers enough to stick around and find out.

 

[Blake]

Yes, but it was designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707. It got hit by the larger 747s.

Which was full of fuel.

The buildings clearly survived the impact of the jets. They did not survive the aftermath.

 

[ND4SPD]

Recently watched this movie. For those who just want to troll about the 9-11 conspiracy stuff, just watch the whole movie. It's not all about 9-11....

 

[McLaren]

I thought only un-intelligent teenagers thought 9/11 was a conspiracy.

I'm always down for a good conspiracy theory (JFK assassination, moon landing, government hiding aliens) but I just don't know about 9/11. Conspiracy theories never have a bunch of creditability and even I will admit they only pick out the information that supports their theory while ignoring other information. I'm sure there would be more creditable if there was more truth to this, interesting idea but I wouldn't think to much into it.

I agree on the JFK conspiracy. Been seeing a lot more discussions about it.

 

[V1P3R]

It's open again?

Love the titanic reference... as long as were getting into it, there was a National Geographic show recently that talked about how it WASN'T a flaw in the ship's design and it was the operator's error or "haste" in getting from point A to B.

 

[TopHat]

It's open again?

Love the titanic reference... as long as were getting into it, there was a National Geographic show recently that talked about how it WASN'T a flaw in the ship's design and it was the operator's error or "haste" in getting from point A to B.

Yep. He could've slowed down, and the damage would have been lesser, and if there was a decent amount of life-rafts, maybe much less people would've perished. One thing that really got to me about the movie was the whole WW1/Lusitania thing... that's seriously messed up.

 

[V1P3R]

I'm not saying the WTC is anything like the titanic btw... If it were in Kalifornya where there's earthquakes maybe but no... not a plane.

 

[GrumpEone]

The steel was molten at temperatures that exceed that of burning jet fuel. You notice how the floors collapsed upon themselves? Where are the core beams? THEY SHOULD BE STICKING UP A FIFTH OF A MILE IN THE SKY. Why was there molten steel under WTC Seven? Why did it collapse in such a controlled manner?

Okay, the 'core beams' as you call them simply don't exist in building construction. Could you imagine trying to steady 1/5 Mile tall beams during construction. The building was built in stages, and is held together by more than just steel beams, there is concrete, floors/ ceilings, etc., that all help to keep the building standing. At the point where on 1 section, the steel warps (from heat), and fails to support its load, that load is transferred to the section below it, then when that section fails the load is transferred again, and so on. This creates far too much load for the steel hold, and the building collapses. Where are these beams you ask, collapsed, crushed, snapped, and melted. The building did not collapse in a controlled manner, there was debris everywhere, did you not see the aftermath photos/ video, but the majority of the building went straight down, due to GRAVITY!

Why aren't any of you actually watching the movie? Maybe you should watch it, and then comment!

Because, it's not a matter of a movie, rather a matter of PHYSICS, LOGIC, and COMMON SENSE!!!!! Maybe you should think for yourself, rather than having a movie do the thinking for you.

It was designed to take multiple impacts from the largest jets of the time. Multiple ones. Once again. Watcheth the movie and the light will click on.

Yes, designed to take impacts, and the building survived a impact larger than what it was designer for, quite well. The Engineers never took into effect what the Jet-Fuel would do to the steel. Also Todays Jet-Fuel burns hotter than what was used at the time of construction.

Also, certain types of steel melts at different points, so I think they'd go for a pretty damn high strength steel.

If you knew anything about the Alloy Steel, you would know that the harder the steel, the more brittle it becomes. The Hardest steel will not bend, it just simply breaks under too much load, and softer steel will bend and twist. Between the weight of the building, and the wind it encounters, a softer steel needs to be used (than the hardest), to allow for the building to sway slightly. If the steel didn't allow for the swaying, the building would simply snap on it's own, under it's own weight, in a heavy wind. Also when steel is heated, it's structure significantly weakens, under Jet-Fuel Temps, steel melts.


So you can lose your conspiracy theory, there is ZERO validity to it. And if you plan on making outragous claims, have something other than a movie to back it up. To back up your claims, try SCIENCE, LOGIC, or COMMON SENSE, so far you have used none of these in your claims.

btw- I saw a movie that said the sky is falling, so you better take cover! lol

 

[Solid Lifters]

They already answered why the steel beams melted to the point of structural failure. The fire proof material that was supposed to protect the steel beams from high temperatures was 'sandblasted' off by the debris created from the aircraft crashing into the building. It left the beams exposed to the flame and heat.

Again, there is no 'conspiracy' to 9/11.

 

[Jay]

Yes, but it was designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707. It got hit by the larger 747s.

Actually they got hit by 767's, which are smaller than 747's but still larger than the 707.

BTW I don't go for any of these conspiracy theorys

 

[Year.Zero]

All your debunkings have been debunked. And so have those. And so have those. Almost every conspiracy put forward so far is put forward by people who know almost absolutely nothing about the actual subject, but rather the "should haves" and "would haves" of the subject—rather than the reality of the matter.