911 truth coming out

Danr, when I posted a thread for you to read, you retorted with '(BTW your link is obviously not objective)". I will admit this was unexpected as I wasn't offering it as any kind of proof, only a source of information on Jeff King. I gather that Mr. Jeff King obtained his BS degree in electrical engineering from MIT way back in the 1970's. This is his only connection with MIT and he never taught or worked there as far as their records show. Is this not true? In fact Jeff King has never been on their faculty. Is this not true?

We got into a discussion today in class about this subject and our professor said, your oppinion must have been based on something and ask me how you were qualified to pass the judgment about this thread being not objective? I had to tell him I had no clue as to your qualifications. Could you be so kind as to tell me how you can determine these things, and what it takes to earn such a talent?

Guess I'm a lot like Cloudsweeper, in that I woudl like a lot more information about this subject, but without all the misinformation involved. You won't believe this but I also agree with a guy called Norm Chomsky who will normally fight at the drop of a hat. He said he wasn't buying into this conspirxcy theory as there was to much black magic being used to determing exactly what did an what didn't happen....on both sides. So if he can't be sure, I guess I'm in good company.

 

The Bush mafia

 

Midas you should have known better. Your post was way too long and too many big words for Danr to be able to read and understand. so he instinctively reacts with what else?? Cut and Paste!

Here's one for our idiot......

 

You know I watched the planes go into those buildings that morning, and I find it hard to beleive that a plane traveling that fast, a passenger jet no less, would have that much time to evenly distribute explosives that over 80 or so floors so a few hours later it could be blown up and fall into itself. It seems the more likely cause was the weakening of the steel support structure as the explosion and the resulting fire slowly and quite evenly melted the beams causing the floors to collapse leading to the chain reation. I remember the bin laden video where he commented that this was even better than in his dreams. Oh yeah, doesn't he have a background in engineering. hmm. I guess maybe because he and others that share the dream of a world run in terror have backgrounds like that they could plan absolute destruction, knowing tensile strengths and ductile properties of steel and whatnot. I am no expert, but I do beleive what I saw with my own eyes

 

And how many 100+ story building have your or the experts seen pancake to the ground after being hit directly by commercial planes with full fuel tanks before this tragedy?

 

I saw the same planes as you did on 9/11. I listened to hi-jacked passenegers leaving messages for their loved ones as they described islamic jihadists taking over their planes. I watched Bin Laden as he explained (joyfully) how the planes tilted before they slammed in the WTC.

But it will never matter to these losers because they are blinded by their hatre from Bush and attribute all the their ills to Bush. It is your typical liberal "victimization" tactic in action! Do you think these people can EVER formulate their own thought and rational? NEVER...they let the move-on-green-peace-losers do it for them, so their only recourse is name-calling. Typical...so typical.

These people hate Bush soooooo much that they can't deal with hard facts and reality. If Bush calls coal "black", these people will see it as white. These people are so "anti-this" and "anti-that" that when you ask them what they are for, other than more income revenue redistribution, they offer NOTHING to the table which it comes to making hard decisions that deal with the health, welfare and security of the United States!

Natural selection will deal with these people. Always have, always will.

 

I sure hate quoting myself, but would appreciate an answer from you on this matter. I"m serious about finding the answer to either 'your' or 'mine' problems of not understanding what happened. I know you must get some enjoyment out of posting your threads on sites but please take the time to respond to my questions. Thank you.

 

That means he will have to think and formulate a response on his own...so grab a Snickers, because you are in for a wait!

 

Remember, you have to give Danr time to find somthing to "Copy and Paste". Since he has not the intelligence to answer questions on his own, he looks for others to do it for him. Now we can all expect another of his "Copy and Paste" insulting photo replies.

 

You are probably aware that this sort of thing can be computer modeled. There are also formulas to calculate the rate of fall for a building collapse. I don't know what they are, so don't ask. All I think is that it is worth examining the doubts raised by those who do understand them, including people involved in demolition. It is said that the laws of physics prevent a building from collapsing into it's own footprint at free-fall speed because of the energy resistance of each floor impacted by the collapse. The only way to add back the energy lost in this manner is to add the use of demolition explosives. Is this true? I don't know but I would like to hear an intelligent discussion by knowledgeable people.

Personally, I don't think there was any demolition of the WTC unless someone presents better evidence. But I'm not an expert.

I fully realize than most people are good at believing, but would rather not think and will resist any effort made to change that. This is a perfect example. Some people believe the WTC collapse was completely natural, and others believe it was artificial. I'd rather substitute a little thinking and investigation for all of the believing going on.

 

ok a straight forward question: Do you believe the 911 commission repoet in its entirety?

 

Here's an article that might explain a thing or three:

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

 

Another article about what happened to some of the steel in Building 7...

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Biederman/Biederman-0112.html

 

Rapid deterioration of the steel was a result of heating with oxidation in combination with intergranular melting due to the presence of sulfur. The formation of the eutectic mixture of iron oxide and iron sulfide lowers the temperature at which liquid can form in this steel. This strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached ~1,000ºC, forming the eutectic liquid by a process similar to making a “blacksmith’s weld” in a hand forge.

1000 degrees C holy cr*p that is hot. That is way hotter than a fire usually gets (I'd say off the top of my head). That second link is great.

 

And an opposing view from a professor at BYU.

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

 

And another peer reviewed paper on the collapse

http://www-math.mit.edu/~bazant/WTC/WTC-asce.pdf

 

Of the four links I posted, 3 have been peer reviewed by professionals in civil engineering or metalurgy in journals dedicated to those fields. The third was peer reviewed as well, but in an obscure marxist economics journal.

 

You still didnt give me an answer Cloudsweeper. Nobody has ever witnessed a 100+ story building implode on itself before. No computer generated model will ever duplicate what has never happened before!