Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: 9/11 Debate (Read 20439 times) previous topic - next topic - Topic derived from CV and mad panic beha...
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #105 –
Quote from: LP on
The next biggest equivalent crash was a B-25 into the Empire State Building.

B-25 = 15m wide x 15,000kg flying at 230mph.

767 = 40m wide x 150,000 to 200,000kg MTOW flying at +550mph. 10x the weight and at least 2x the speed,

We need a physicist to tell us all about kinetic and potential energy! ;)

Do you need an engineer to explain to you the different relative strengths of the buildings they crashed into?

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #106 –
Quote from: Gointocarlton on
Fire rating of beams, walls etc is typically limited to a time, 2hr, 4hr etc. Buildings of structural steel construction (as they do in in the US) are not designed to support an impact by a jetliner full of Jet A. Nothing more complicated than that IMO.
Building was actually designed to withstand the impact of a plane flying into them.

Which adds to the level of mystery of why it didn't work.

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #107 –
Well, fellow CSC Members, yours truly has just learned of a tragedy close to home. One of my closest mates of around 46 years has just died of Covid. Shattered. Top bloke. Super intelligent. Overweight but otherwise healthy... he was on secondment in the Philippines. 66 years of age. Family shattered. We're all in disbelief. Not one of those to die from Covid with another underlying issue. Covid... then pneumonia (no previous lung issues)... then gone. Apparently received full, quality medical care.

I lived with his family in 1974 when serving at HMAS Waterhen, Waverton (I was a 'spook' - encryption and decryption stuff). Waterhen was a land base for patrol boats/mine sweepers etc. Beautiful family. Like a brother. He was doing an economics degree. Although a Sydneysider I steered him to the BlueBaggers in the AFL. Communicated with him only a few days ago... he was as bright as ever.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #108 –
Quote from: Baggers on
Well, fellow CSC Members, yours truly has just learned of a tragedy close to home. One of my closest mates of around 46 years has just died of Covid. Shattered. Top bloke. Super intelligent. Overweight but otherwise healthy... he was on secondment in the Philippines. 66 years of age. Family shattered. We're all in disbelief. Not one of those to die from Covid with another underlying issue. Covid... then pneumonia (no previous lung issues)... then gone. Apparently received full, quality medical care.

I lived with his family in 1974 when serving at HMAS Waterhen, Waverton (I was a 'spook' - encryption and decryption stuff). Waterhen was a land base for patrol boats/mine sweepers etc. Beautiful family. Like a brother. He was doing an economics degree. Although a Sydneysider I steered him to the BlueBaggers in the AFL. Communicated with him only a few days ago... he was as bright as ever.
Sad news Baggers, sympathies to you and your friends family...

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #109 –
Ask the parents of that kid who was killed in Canberra by the controlled demolition, and the people around him at the time.

Buildings don't collapse in silence, the noise after a demolition implosion is bigger and louder than the bang that sets them falling, described by many wrongly as a second series of explosions after the demolition explosions are long long gone! That is frequently the internal floors pancaking, and when tonnes of flat surface pancake it creates a shockwave / pressure wave akin to an explosion, the same mechanism as clapping your hands.

The innocent bystanders on record are not expert witnesses, seeing something dramatic once in their life that they have never seen before, they neither have the words or training to explain what they saw, and most of the words gleamed from interviews are placed there by inadvertent suggestions from the interviewers. It is the experts listening to those reports, and making the associations with real world actions, that build a picture of the event.
The Force Awakens!

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #111 –
Quote from: kruddler on
Building was actually designed to withstand the impact of a plane flying into them.

Which adds to the level of mystery of why it didn't work.
I remember watching something about the design of it and they said it wasn't defined for it. Ill Try and dig it up.
2017-16th
2018-Wooden Spoon
2019-16th
2020-dare to dream? 11th is better than last I suppose
2021-Pi$$ or get off the pot
2022- Real Deal or more of the same? 0.6%
2023- "Raise the Standard" - M. Voss Another year wasted Bar Set
2024-Back to the drawing boardNo excuses, its time

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #112 –
Quote from: Baggers on
Well, fellow CSC Members, yours truly has just learned of a tragedy close to home. One of my closest mates of around 46 years has just died of Covid. Shattered. Top bloke. Super intelligent. Overweight but otherwise healthy... he was on secondment in the Philippines. 66 years of age. Family shattered. We're all in disbelief. Not one of those to die from Covid with another underlying issue. Covid... then pneumonia (no previous lung issues)... then gone. Apparently received full, quality medical care.

I lived with his family in 1974 when serving at HMAS Waterhen, Waverton (I was a 'spook' - encryption and decryption stuff). Waterhen was a land base for patrol boats/mine sweepers etc. Beautiful family. Like a brother. He was doing an economics degree. Although a Sydneysider I steered him to the BlueBaggers in the AFL. Communicated with him only a few days ago... he was as bright as ever.
Sorry to hear this @Baggers, reality of this is not nice at all and not trivial.
The Force Awakens!

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #113 –
Quote from: Baggers on
Most of the fuel was reported, live at the time, to have exploded and belched out of the buildings. This was later confirmed. As I've mentioned... I simply remain suspicious of the official story and probably am in the 'splinters on clacker' group.
Nothing wrong with that. You are at least looking into the other side of the debate, which is more than anyone else arguing against it.

Truthfully, i was on the complete other side of the fence.
As mentioned before, the biggest road block for people entertaining the possibility that it was deliberate is the 'Why?' question.
Why would the US (potentially) do that to themselves?

They have a history of it in their own declassified documents.

Once that question, the biggest road block, had gone....i looked at other questions....and there was more than enough evidence as to why the official party lines didn't make sense either.
The more you look, the more you find.
As Mav said, its a rabbit hole.
However, just because you are curious about 1 rabbit hole, doesn't mean you bother heading down others.

Play the ball on its merits.
 

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #114 –
Quote from: LP on
Yes, go for it!

Sure.

I've found this video. Its compiled by 3400 architects and engineers and they explains things in a way that even you can understand.
There are actually 3 parts to it.

Would you like a link?

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #115 –
I'll be bowing out of this and other discussions for a while. The death of my mate makes discussion about fires and buildings seem somewhat tiny at the moment. Still in shock and disbelief. Just communicated with his sister and his mum, time for Shano to head north and support my 'other' family.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #116 –
Quote from: Gointocarlton on
I remember watching something about the design of it and they said it wasn't defined for it. Ill Try and dig it up.
Take out the "wasn't" and you have @kruddler‍ have posted the same thing.

Surely one word can't bring down a building?

PS: I believe I saw the same interview, someone involved with the original design. I suppose he was just "covering his ar5e!"
The Force Awakens!

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #117 –
Quote from: Gointocarlton on
I remember watching something about the design of it and they said it wasn't defined for it. Ill Try and dig it up.

I've heard otherwise.

The US government has even had war game scenarios which involves what would happen if terrorists tried to fly planes into the WTCs. I think it was talking about that where it was mentioned that the buildings were designed with this possibility in mind.

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #118 –
Quote from: kruddler on
Sure.

I've found this video. Its compiled by 3400 architects and engineers and they explains things in a way that even you can understand.
There are actually 3 parts to it.

Would you like a link?
No, I'd prefer an explanation in your own words, using your physics training.

If you've gone to the trouble to watch it all, I'm happy for you to summarise and explain it in the common language I can understand.
The Force Awakens!

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #119 –
Quote from: Baggers on
I'll be bowing out of this and other discussions for a while. The death of my mate makes discussion about fires and buildings seem somewhat tiny at the moment. Still in shock and disbelief. Just communicated with his sister and his mum, time for Shano to head north and support my 'other' family.

There are more important things in life to worry about.

You do you.

Apologies.