| |||
|
whats your favorite conspiracy theory?1,204 views |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 3:34 am |
| i have some free time today and i'm going to educate myself |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 3:35 am |
| or give me some conspiracy theory websites |
| Atomic - 9/5/07, 3:36 am |
| that tupac is dead. |
| grandmapucker - 9/5/07, 3:36 am |
| that white people were created in a lab by a mad scientist |
| TheStallion - 9/5/07, 3:38 am |
| the Philadelphia Experiment |
| sugenate - 9/5/07, 3:39 am |
| www.whatreallyhappened.com |
| sugenate - 9/5/07, 3:39 am |
| rense.com has some good shit too |
| digger - 9/5/07, 3:40 am |
| matt = commiserate |
| neogonzo - 9/5/07, 3:41 am |
| The Andrew W.K. Doppleganger |
| digger - 9/5/07, 3:41 am |
| oh and neogonzo / neopolitan = same dude |
| brit - 9/5/07, 3:42 am |
| go watch jfk. |
| christopherlame - 9/5/07, 3:42 am |
| reptilian queen mother |
| danger - 9/5/07, 3:44 am |
| Try to master this |
| samantha - 9/5/07, 3:48 am |
| I know that's not your favorite adam |
| samantha - 9/5/07, 3:48 am |
| I know that's not your favorite adam |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 3:48 am |
| The one about the 19 men armed with box cutters were able to hijack 4 u.s. passenger jets, who piloted them around U.S. airspace unchallenged by any air defense in the most densely populated portion of the country for the better part of 2 hours, collide two of them into two of the world's largest building, causing them -- AND a 3rd gigantic building to implode -- and collide another of the captured planes into the U.S. primary military headquarters (also completely unchallenged). And they did this under the leadership of an evil man in a cave in Afghanistan who is still at large. |
| brit - 9/5/07, 3:49 am |
| well when you put it that way... |
| nico - 9/5/07, 3:59 am |
| moon landing was faked |
| nokahoma - 9/5/07, 4:02 am |
| nine unknown men / ancient Indian nukes destroyed Atlantis, etc. |
| neogonzo - 9/5/07, 4:02 am |
| http://awilkeskrier.homestead.com/ - this is the Andrew WK page, i find it more than fascinating... |
| dan g - 9/5/07, 4:03 am |
| sisto takes 67% of the door. |
| asemisldkfj - 9/5/07, 4:17 am |
| hahaha uhuru |
| jimoo - 9/5/07, 4:18 am |
| Wow, Uhuru really is insane. |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 4:20 am |
| that Shakespeare was actually Sir Francis Bacon ... which I actually believe! |
| cripes - 9/5/07, 4:21 am |
| that awk site is insane |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 4:21 am |
| i like most things relating to the New World Order |
| cripes - 9/5/07, 4:21 am |
| yea, davidlopan, i haven't ruled that one out either |
| katie_mc - 9/5/07, 4:23 am |
| gangstalking |
| TheLustyGhost - 9/5/07, 4:25 am |
| nico - 09/05/07 at 10:59 am (24.218.26.4) moon landing was faked Shadow government-type ones are fun because they're usually on the more convincing end of the spectrum. Is the world secretly governed by a tightly-knit, centralized organization of corporate leaders who have installed pupped governments around the world? I doubt it. Are corporations more powerful than government? Sometimes. But there's no need for conspiracy to explain that, jsut circumstance. |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 5:26 am |
| its true cripes. plus its a conspiracy theory we can all feel good about. or maybe a little sad b/c bacon never felt as though he could openly be a playwright, beholden as he was to the expectations of his day. |
| diana - 9/5/07, 5:28 am |
| oh my god, don't get me started GANGSTALKING. YES. THANK YOU KATIE_MC. also the "yacub 7 ali" hoax (apparently). look it up, its insane. |
| Al - 9/5/07, 5:28 am |
| uhuru2u - 09/05/07 at 10:48 am (69.38.80.161) The one about the 19 men armed with box cutters were able to hijack 4 u.s. passenger jets, who piloted them around U.S. airspace unchallenged by any air defense in the most densely populated portion of the country for the better part of 2 hours, collide two of them into two of the world's largest building, causing them -- AND a 3rd gigantic building to implode -- and collide another of the captured planes into the U.S. primary military headquarters (also completely unchallenged). And they did this under the leadership of an evil man in a cave in Afghanistan who is still at large. ditto.. .the 9/11 as inside job theory... |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 5:31 am |
| TheLustyGhost - 09/05/07 at 11:25 am (72.85.160.213) Shadow government-type ones are fun because they're usually on the more convincing end of the spectrum. Is the world secretly governed by a tightly-knit, centralized organization of corporate leaders who have installed pupped governments around the world? I doubt it. Are corporations more powerful than government? Sometimes. But there's no need for conspiracy to explain that, jsut circumstance. i think people in power manage "naturally occurring" circumstances to their benefit, and that feels a lot like conspiracy to the rest of us. or it is conspiracy. I still prefer the tale that the guy who wrote de rerum natura felt too silly putting his name on things like hamlet, as you like it and taming of the shrew ... even though those were better. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 5:34 am |
| I like the one about a small cabal politically inept politicians who can barely keep their inner circle loyal to them somehow engineering the murder of 3000 americans and the disappearance of a few airplanes without ever getting found out. |
| cmusnyder - 9/5/07, 5:36 am |
| yeah skull and bones and all that |
| jimoo - 9/5/07, 5:37 am |
| Yeah, the idea that the government could keep something like that a secret is beyond all belief. I have no trouble believing what actually happened, happened, in comparison. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 5:37 am |
| actually I don't really like any conspiracy theories. except for the JFK assassination. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 5:41 am |
| it was easy. all they had to do was reroute 3 airplanes to secret bunkers and then euthanize several hundred passengers. then all they had to do was covertly set up plastic explosives inside three skyscrapers and have two airplanes fly into them and then explode all three of the buildings (after tipping off several hundred jews). then they simply had to fly a cruise missile into the pentagon and distribute trash in rural pennsylvania as part of a brilliant PR move to fool people into thinking that valient passengers subdued their highjackers. |
| Fowler - 9/5/07, 5:52 am |
| the government ramping down space exploration and telescopes because of previous contact with aliens |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 5:55 am |
| You forgot that they also had to convince WTC7 to commit suicide in solidarity with his two larger comrade-building, neo. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 5:57 am |
| couldn't they have made at least one of the highjackers iraqi? thats all im asking for. i mentioned wtc7, uhuru. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 5:57 am |
| tinobeat - 09/05/07 at 12:34 pm (67.151.118.51) I like the one about a small cabal politically inept politicians who can barely keep their inner circle loyal to them somehow engineering the murder of 3000 americans and the disappearance of a few airplanes without ever getting found out. its easy to keep a secret about something that no one wants to know the truth about. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 6:01 am |
| yeah but you said it had have been covertly laden with explosives. another possibilty is it just committed suicide (although that doesn't explain the firefighters who knew the building was going to be "pulled", but whatever where are those firefighters now?) |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 6:02 am |
| oh ok, sorry i misunderstood you. |
| TheLustyGhost - 9/5/07, 6:02 am |
| davidlopan - 09/05/07 at 12:31 pm (204.167.92.26) i think people in power manage "naturally occurring" circumstances to their benefit, and that feels a lot like conspiracy to the rest of us. Yeah, that's pretty much how I feel. Conspiracy theories are understandable, though. It's much more comforting to think that there's a person or group who control everything you don't like than to recognize that the way things are is a complex, ongoing process that even the most sophisticated, insidious conspiracy would only be a small part of. I peg most serious conspiracy people as having control issues, who gain a sense of control by ascribing things to a complex but logical - and therefore systematically understandable - system. Even though they can't excercise any tangible control over it, they can "own" it by understanding it. Someone looking for that would probably be pretty disturbed by the idea that maybe people AREN'T able to control their environment beyond the most superficial levels - at best we can affect some lasting changes, but that's hardly control at all. If you're not comfortable with that, conspiracies (or politics, or organized religion, or stamp collecting...) are probably pretty seductive to you. |
| danger - 9/5/07, 6:04 am |
| samantha - 09/05/07 at 10:48 am (216.220.216.172) I know that's not your favorite adam Then what is my favorite, the one about you? |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 6:08 am |
| its ok. i don't want to get into a another 9/11 debate. i was just sharing my favorite consiparcy theory, which is the mainstream explanation for what went down on 9/11. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 6:10 am |
| uhuru2u - 09/05/07 at 01:01 pm (69.38.80.161) yeah but you said it had have been covertly laden with explosives. another possibilty is it just committed suicide (although that doesn't explain the firefighters who knew the building was going to be "pulled", but whatever where are those firefighters now?) How many of those firefighters were either Licensed Structural Engineers, or Licensed Fire Protection Engineers? Because I can predict all sorts of stuff, but if it comes true, that doesn't meake me an authority on that. Also again, it is possible for a fire fueled by diesel fuel from the emergency generators in that building left to burn unchecked to compromise Structural Steel to the point of massive structural failure. So please do not start up with this whole "I'm going to ignore physics, and engineering because the government is using it to explain things again." Also, Popular Mechanics says you're full of shit |
| prospectofdeath - 9/5/07, 6:11 am |
| 'christ as messiah' |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 6:19 am |
| eric - 09/05/07 at 01:10 pm (68.236.79.4) Also again, it is possible for a fire fueled by diesel fuel from the emergency generators in that building left to burn unchecked to compromise Structural Steel to the point of massive structural failure. ok, has a fire ever reduced sky scraper made of steel and concrete to rubble in history before it supposedly happend to WTC 7? i don't give a fuck about popular mechanics or that shitty artcle. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 6:22 am |
| its easy to keep a secret about something that no one wants to know the truth about. except that there's plenty of people who'd be very interested, and plenty of people who would do anything to blow the whistle on an operation THAT big. You think George Bush doesn't have enemies in very high places? |
| nate - 9/5/07, 6:26 am |
| i bury paul |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 6:28 am |
| not among the capitalist ruling class. at least i don't believe there are anyway. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 6:33 am |
| uhuru2u - 09/05/07 at 01:28 pm (69.38.80.161) not among the capitalist ruling class. at least i don't believe there are anyway. with all due respect, thats a terribly naive thing to believe. You really think all the rich white capitalists in the world think he's doing a great job? why are there people even running against him? Why were there billionaires pouring out money to get him out of office and stop his policies? You really believe the ruling class are all just buddies? |
| sugenate - 9/5/07, 6:37 am |
| this thread reminds me of a knock knock joke i heard recently. it goes like this Knock Knock Who's there? Sept 11th Sept 11th who? YOU SAID YOU WOULD NEVER FORGET! |
| eric - 9/5/07, 6:39 am |
| Fire didn't reduce the bulding to rubble, the fire caused the Steel frame supporting the building to
weaken sufficiently, that the weight of the building itself caused it to fall and turn into rubble.
I mean, do you know how heavy those things are? Buildings wheigh a lot and are held together by
adhesives, and nuts and bolts and nails, attached to these giant structural steel, or sometimes even
concrete frames. If the frame collapses, all of the things attached to it fall down and come apart.
Most building elements these days are not self supporting. Most exterior walls of buildings play
very, very minor roles in supporting buildings, most of the time the exterior walls are completely
non structural, and would not even support themselves if it were not for the structure burried
whithin them. I could not say whether or not it has ever caused another "skyscraper" to do this, but fire has absolutely caused structural failure in countless other steel frame buildings. It is the reason why there are these manuals called "Building Codes" and "Fire Codes" that rule a very large part of my profession. |
| iheartlawyers - 9/5/07, 6:42 am |
| i dunno eric, it all sounds like a lot of sorcery to me. |
| cmusnyder - 9/5/07, 6:46 am |
| man, eric sounds like he's full of shit. |
| level60WIZARD - 9/5/07, 6:49 am |
| bullshit. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 6:49 am |
| Guys, shhh. Not yet.... |
| level60WIZARD - 9/5/07, 6:49 am |
| bullshit. not eric. |
| level60WIZARD - 9/5/07, 6:49 am |
| bullshit. not eric. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 7:14 am |
| tinobeat - 09/05/07 at 01:33 pm (67.151.118.51) uhuru2u - 09/05/07 at 01:28 pm (69.38.80.161) not among the capitalist ruling class. at least i don't believe there are anyway. with all due respect, thats a terribly naive thing to believe. You really think all the rich white capitalists in the world think he's doing a great job? why are there people even running against him? Why were there billionaires pouring out money to get him out of office and stop his policies? You really believe the ruling class are all just buddies? Not buddies, in fact some very hostile relationships, but by definition they all share the same class interests. When class interests are in crisis, they huddle together, that's why there is no meaningful opposition against the war in Iraq |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 7:15 am |
| eric - 09/05/07 at 01:39 pm (68.236.79.4) Fire didn't reduce the bulding to rubble, the fire caused the Steel frame supporting the building to weaken sufficiently, that the weight of the building itself caused it to fall and turn into rubble. has that ever happened in history before it happened to WTC 7? |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 7:18 am |
| Has a fire ever made a building do this before: <img src=http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/small_wtc-7_1_.gif"> |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 7:18 am |
| oops IMAGE REMOVED - CLICK TO VIEW |
| grandmapucker - 9/5/07, 7:19 am |
| fire made a building herf? |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 7:20 am |
| everybody herfs sometimes. |
| grandmapucker - 9/5/07, 7:21 am |
| has fire ever made a building herf before? |
| uallach - 9/5/07, 7:30 am |
| luckily we have countless other incidences of two huge jets full of jet fuel slamming into enormous skyscrapers to compare wtc to |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 7:31 am |
| no jet full of anything hit that building, although it does do the similar free fall straight down that WTCs 1 & 2 did. |
| sugenate - 9/5/07, 7:34 am |
| how anyone can 100% believe the "official" story of sept 11th blows my mind. people get angry when you disagree too. i dont claim to know any of the answers, but anyone who does, is full of fucking dung. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 7:38 am |
| Yes Uhuru2u, I am certain that fire has caused structural failure before WTC7. Maybe not on a scale
as large as it did there, but we can both agree that was a very unique circumstances, unlike any
that had previously occured. Listen, I'm not saying there was no conspiracy involved in any of that, I am just saying that contrary to your belief, there are some very rational explanations for what happened to all of those buildings, that engineering and building science, and physics very easily support. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 7:42 am |
| Yes Uhuru2u, I am certain that fire has caused structural failure before WTC7. Maybe not on a scale
as large as it did there, but we can both agree that was a very unique circumstances, unlike any
that had previously occured. can you show me some examples? i find the arguments and the photo evidence that there have been have been huge infernos that have swallowed large portions of buildings in flame for hours, but this is the first time in history that fire has led to the failure of the support beams in a giant skyscraper, and therefore this probably wasn't caused by a fire, either compelling |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 7:44 am |
| I dunno, I don't put much stock in 120x90 pixel anigifs to be evidence of anything. Not buddies, in fact some very hostile relationships, but by definition they all share the same class interests. When class interests are in crisis, they huddle together, that's why there is no meaningful opposition against the war in Iraq The Iraq war isn't "class interests", its a political power struggle. Some people believe the US occupation was a good idea for the country, others think its bad for the country (and by association, their interests). Is that weird or hard to understand? You could even paint a picture of the worst classist motherfucker (lets call him Bat Puchanan) and his CLASS INTERESTS involve getting out of Iraq. There are so many levels to it all. Nobody's huddling over it, and in fact, real opposition to the war is what people are using to gain more power. Bush still holds the reins, so no meaningful ACTION has happened, but opposition outweighs support on all levels. But that doens't work well into your very specific black & white worldview, so you conveniently ignore these things, it seems. The funny thing is you're the same person excusing massive power abuses from "socialist" leaders, as if they're not part of the same ruling class. Oh well. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 7:46 am |
| Uhuru2U, if you read that article, you would know that that building had emergency diesel generators
in it, and an enormous ammount of diesel fuel, that fed the fire. Yes, no jet fuel, but there was
conventiaonal diesel fuel. FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom — approximately 10 stories — about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner. NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse. According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down." There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities. Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time." WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors — along with the building's unusual construction — were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 7:47 am |
| But that doens't work well into your very specific black & white worldview, so you conveniently
ignore these things, it seems. you're looking at the behavoir of the u.s. ruling class through the war in iraq and your seeing significant opposition somewhere, and i'm the one with the delusional worldview. whatever. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 7:49 am |
| Posted from the article by the way. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 7:50 am |
| sugenate - 09/05/07 at 02:34 pm (128.197.37.172) how anyone can 100% believe the "official" story of sept 11th blows my mind. people get angry when you disagree too. i dont claim to know any of the answers, but anyone who does, is full of fucking dung. the "official" story is very complex and has holes in it. That doesn't mean a larger narrative can't logically fit over it (hijackings are not some weird new thing, they were very common, the organization believed to be responsible has a track record of very successful large scale civilian attacks). a LOT happened that day, and should still be investiggated. But to speak in absolutes (no plane hit the pentagon!) is just as silly. It angers people because its agenda driven (BUSH DID IT) and tries to put everything together in service of that agenda, rather than an investigation into what actually happened. I don't know exactly what happened, but I also don't have anything invested in having the answer go this way or that. Its just as damning to the government that they took an actual terrorist attack and used it to make this country a far far worse place and totally throw decades of diplomatic alliances out the window for cheap political scores. It could still fit the "official" narrative and still be a horrible indictment of US foreign policy and the Bush Presidency. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 7:52 am |
| I guess we'll agree to disagree, then uhuru. I could have sworn that the fact that most US politicians openly speak out against the war and many were put into power based on their very real opposition to the war meant there was, I dunno, opposition to the war. The fact that the government is ineffective in putting that into action (the can of worms is large, after all) doesn't mean there isn't opposition. But whatever, white people. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 7:55 am |
| The explanation of the 19 hijackers is also "agenda driven," but most people are relatively to extremely cool with it. so that's not the explanation why people trying to get to the bottom of what happened on 9/11 anger those of us who (you) aren't. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 7:58 am |
| How is it "agenda driven?" Were other hijackings and bombings by this same organization also fabrications? |
| eric - 9/5/07, 7:59 am |
| Also from the article- "Melted" Steel Claim: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC." FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks." "Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat. But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F. "The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down." |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 8:00 am |
| eric, that "evidence" of "temperature" is just "agenda driven" have you seen that anigif? OK, I'm peacin out of this, uhuru and I are just talking past each other, not worth it. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 8:01 am |
| tinobeat - 09/05/07 at 02:58 pm (67.151.118.51) How is it "agenda driven?" Were other hijackings and bombings by this same organization also fabrications? there is no way we'd be in iraq and afghanistan if it weren't for 9/11. whoever did 9/11 gave bush carte blanche to push the agenda he was looking for and boost his popularity which was piss poor before 9/11. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 8:06 am |
| you think that if 9/11 was orchestrated in order to drum up support for the eventual invasion of iraq that they would have done a better job making at 9/11 - Iraq connection. i mean, if they can pull off an attack that complicated on american soil they shouldn't have had such a hard time "finding" a cache of nukes the middle of the desert or correspondence btw saddam and bin laden or something. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 8:07 am |
| I keep forgetting how popular Bush is. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 8:12 am |
| he was extremely popular after 9/11. the most popular he's ever been as a president. i don't know
why they didn't associate iraq with 9/11. but the truth is they didn't have to. i forget how many
americans believe that iraq was involved with 9/11 anyway, but its a sizable portion. Popular Mechanics says: "With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated." Since the building was totally destroyed (and the debris removed and shipped overseas to blast furnaces), what evidence is available to NIST that was not available to FEMA? Or does NIST really mean that it has now had time to fabricate the "evidence" that it needs? And note that NIST researchers do not say that "WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated", merely that this is a "working hypothesis" that they "support" (by means of their fabricated evidence?). That WTC 7 was brought down in a controlled demolition is obviously not a hypothesis, working or otherwise, that those who pay their salaries could "support". "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down." Oh, really? So the architects of WTC 7 designed it like a house of cards. Goodness gracious! Did they never consider the possibility of "a vertical progression of collapse"? Such idiots! But how convenient for NIST. The Mayor of New York on 9/11, Rudolph Giuliani, had created a "disaster control center" on the 23rd floor of WTC 7 (it was completed in 1997). Some say that this was the place from which the disaster of 9/11 was controlled. If so, all physical evidence relating to it was destroyed as a result of the collapse of the building. Giuliani was there on the morning of 9/11, but left after the South Tower collapsed. Larry Silverstein, the owner of WTC 7 (and insurance beneficiary) is reported to have admitted in a PBS video that a decision was made to "pull" (demolish?) the building (see Silverstein, FDNY Razed WTC 7). |
| jimoo - 9/5/07, 8:15 am |
| I keep having to ignore the multi millionaires that come through here that hate the war and dislike Bush. I should tell them that they're in the same class so they should remember they're on the same team. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 8:15 am |
| i just dont get the motive. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 8:16 am |
| Al Qaeda has every reason to draw the US into global conflicts they knew it can't sustain. US
popularity around the globe is at an all time low, diplomatic ties are in the toilet, the US is a
hollow shell of its former self in terms of its ability to 1) defend itself 2) make friends 3)
threaten others. Sounds like a success story you could get behind! I mean, think about it in a narrative form you might support: - the US act like imperialist assholes and meddle in the middle east's affairs. They prop up Israel, they prop up the Mujahadeen and train and arm them, they pal around with one of the most oppressive nations on earth (Saudi Arabia), they essentially stir together a stew of imperial bullshit stew. We all know this. - Brave anti-American fighters begin an grassroots organization that looks to undermine the filthy imperialists interests worldwide. They bomb hotels, nightclubs, battleships, hijack planes, do all kinds of righteous rebellious shit in order to slowly chip away at the imperial aggressor that is both culturally and politically destroying their home. - one sunny Tuesday in 2001, they score their best shot EVER against the horrible oppressive nation, killing 3000 of its citizens and even landing a (somewhat flaccid and ineffective) blow on the central headquarters of the worlds largest military. - Instead of reacting to this criminal act by a grassroots organization with police-type action, the wildly unpopular president of the imperialist aggressors takes the opportunity to ineffectively strike back. The scrappy rebels take some losses and lose a safe haven in Afghanistan, but are quickly given a new safe haven from which to plan more bombings (success in London and Madrid!) due to the blinded giant destabilizing various countries, meaning the organization of rebels has an environment in which more and more people opposed to the imperialists are willing to sympathize and even join them! Their numbers are soaring! - The dirty imperialists' army is stretched to its limit bogged down in a civil war it would be almost impossible to extract from, all it can do is give empty threats to the wildly successful rebellion. I don't see why the US would fake that, do you? The funny thing is, both of us think our stories make the Bush Administration a catastrophic element in the world. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 8:20 am |
| the response to the PM article is from a reply to popular mechanics. it responds to every one of the articles "FACT"s |
| the.rog - 9/5/07, 8:21 am |
| for a plan THAT complex to have actually involved president bush, it would've had to have been started at some point before he became president. |
| takeo - 9/5/07, 8:22 am |
| I don't really believe it, but I'm a huge fan of the whole "Illuminati taking over the
world" conspiracy theory. this one is good too prospectofdeath - 09/05/07 at 01:11 pm (207.172.212.138) 'christ as messiah' |
| jimoo - 9/5/07, 8:26 am |
| uhuru2u - 09/05/07 at 03:20 pm (69.38.80.161) the response to the PM article is from a reply to popular mechanics. it responds to every one of the articles "FACT"s Wait, a random blog compared to Popular Mechanics and you take the blogs opinion? I should be appalled, but with you, I'm not. |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 8:31 am |
| Beria killed Stalin. I believe that one too. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 8:33 am |
| if the blog makes better points than the magazine then yes i go with the blog. i'm not as impressed by credentials or the fact that some information has a lot of money and power behind it as you are. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 8:34 am |
| beria definitely killed stalin. |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 8:37 am |
| seems obvious neopolitan. a mind yeti WAS unleashed on long island. that one is true too. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 8:38 am |
| tell me more about the mind yeti! |
| the.rog - 9/5/07, 8:39 am |
| you only think that the blog makes better points because you agree with them! |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 8:41 am |
| behold THE MONTAUCK PROJECT |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 8:42 am |
| How about my story about the successful blowback against horrid imperialist policy, uhuru? Its more plausible, in my mind, than a charade so elaborate it would have to have involved more people than actually died in the events. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 8:42 am |
| woah |
| eric - 9/5/07, 8:45 am |
| hahahahahahahaha This argument is as silly and pointless as the last time it happened. and the.rog - 09/05/07 at 03:39 pm (192.136.22.4) you only think that the blog makes better points because you agree with them! |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 8:47 am |
| don't listen to any of the hooha that says it's just a "science fiction book" ... IMAGE REMOVED - CLICK TO VIEW |
| thedeathofsid - 9/5/07, 8:49 am |
| MOTHMANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN |
| joedinkin - 9/5/07, 8:51 am |
| andy kaufman is not dead. we landed on the moon in '52, mars in '62, and jfk was gonna tell america in dallas, and that's why they aced him. hollow earth. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 8:52 am |
| eric - 09/05/07 at 03:45 pm (68.236.79.4) hahahahahahahaha This argument is as silly and pointless as the last time it happened. and the.rog - 09/05/07 at 03:39 pm (192.136.22.4) you only think that the blog makes better points because you agree with them! ____________ no, i think its fair to question what additional evidence NIST was able to acquire with their additional time and resources regarding a building that was totally destroyed and its parts shipped overseas to be destroyed. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 8:53 am |
| joedinkin - 09/05/07 at 03:51 pm (72.248.27.240) andy kaufman is not dead. we landed on the moon in '52, mars in '62, and jfk was gonna tell america in dallas, and that's why they aced him. hollow earth. these are all very good |
| the.rog - 9/5/07, 8:53 am |
| no, i've read ALL of those accounts (both sides) before, and literally, all of the "final"
ones from the conspiracy theorists are pretty much this "NUH UHHHH! HAVE YOU EVER CONSIDERED THISSSSSSS???" |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 8:56 am |
| tinobeat - 09/05/07 at 03:42 pm (67.151.118.51) How about my story about the successful blowback against horrid imperialist policy, uhuru? Its more plausible, in my mind, than a charade so elaborate it would have to have involved more people than actually died in the events. ----------- that's what i first believed when it happened, but the evidence for an inside job is simply stronger -- to me at least. Also, the things that the Bush administration are doing under the 9/11 banner, they were planning for a long time before 9/11, even speculating that the american population won't go for in without some cataclysmic like a pearl harbor. It was in a document i believe written in 1999, called "rebuilding america's defenses" by a think-tank called "project for a new american century" |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 8:57 am |
| the.rog - 09/05/07 at 03:53 pm (192.136.22.4) no, i've read ALL of those accounts (both sides) before, and literally, all of the "final" ones from the conspiracy theorists are pretty much this "NUH UHHHH! HAVE YOU EVER CONSIDERED THISSSSSSS???" we are all conspiracy theorists here. no one is trying to argue there wasn't a conspiracy at hand. |
| grandmapucker - 9/5/07, 8:57 am |
| # Reptilian humanoids—According to David Icke, a group of reptilian humanoids called the Babylonian Brotherhood control a secret world government. Icke has accused many prominent politicians and celebrities of being such creatures, including George W. Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, and Kris Kristofferson. |
| the.rog - 9/5/07, 8:57 am |
| you mean in the 10 months between the election and 9/11? or do you think that the whole FL debacle was part of the scheme? |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 8:58 am |
| water goes down the drain the other way south of the equator. refuse, resist. |
| joedinkin - 9/5/07, 8:58 am |
| neopolitan, thanks! i pride myself on believing in/being interested in cool conspiracy theories. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 8:59 am |
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_%28Fomenko%29 how about people that think that most of history was made up ? |
| eric - 9/5/07, 9:00 am |
| uhuru2u - 09/05/07 at 03:52 pm (69.38.80.161) eric - 09/05/07 at 03:45 pm (68.236.79.4) hahahahahahahaha This argument is as silly and pointless as the last time it happened. and the.rog - 09/05/07 at 03:39 pm (192.136.22.4) you only think that the blog makes better points because you agree with them! ____________ no, i think its fair to question what additional evidence NIST was able to acquire with their additional time and resources regarding a building that was totally destroyed and its parts shipped overseas to be destroyed. That's fine, you're just dismissing a bit of that timeline, and you seem to have no understanding of what may have actually taken place in terms of analyzing the debris, and testing it to find out what had happened. You're saying all of this as if they immediately put the debris on a boat to Europe, or wherever to go into a blast furnace. and really, what were they supposed to do, save all the parts on an island somewhere forever? What do you think happens to scrap steel? THEY RECYCLE IT. |
| the.rog - 9/5/07, 9:00 am |
| i think that the biggest conspiracy is the one that uhuru2u is NOT a giant eggplant. |
| neopolitan - 9/5/07, 9:01 am |
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_in_Chaos and no problem, joe! im a big fan of the "moongate" type conspiracies, but im not familiar with the moon in '52/mars in '62 one. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 9:03 am |
| Also, the things that the Bush administration are doing under the 9/11 banner, they were planning
for a long time before 9/11, even speculating that the american population won't go for in without
some cataclysmic like a pearl harbor. It was in a document i believe written in 1999, called
"rebuilding america's defenses" by a think-tank called "project for a new american
century" yeah, I know about PNAC, that shit is insidious. The point I'll concede is that its possible they had KNOWLEDGE of an impending attack and let it go through in order to be able to have justification to go through with all their ill-conceived ideas. But the thing is, this administration and the people surrounding it are SO incompetent that they really haven't gotten anything right. Its easy to imagine them silencing a couple of CIA agents who may have said "you know, this shit is coming" and basically just ignored the threat in order to have an excuse for war, rather than what you're proposing, which seems like it would have involved THOUSANDS of people keeping a very very delicate story together, without talking, for 7 years. But yeah, I think Dick Cheney and his gang are horrible enough that they might have just stood idly by and let it happen, as it *was* a great galvanizing force for them. I'm not SURE that's what happened, but I totally believe its a possibility. Demolitions, missing airplanes and passengers, pieces of buildings shipped abroad to be destroyed, that's really just so elaborate that it doesn't NEARLY pass the smell test. |
| the.rog - 9/5/07, 9:12 am |
| it's like the plot of matchstick men. there's no way that i can believe that so many people would coordinate in such a complicated plot with so little (relatively) to gain. |
| rhw - 9/5/07, 9:19 am |
| Tino's a LIHOP?! Holy Smokes! My mantra in regards to 9/11 re-investigations is that should be all about the money trail. That's easily tracable, provable, very-much-not-sci-fi stuff right there. For example just read this Pakistan/ISI timeline of events in regards to 9/11. Everything on that site is sourced from legitimate newspapers which is really helpful. Why this isn't harped on by the mainstream press truly boggles the mind. |
| cripes - 9/5/07, 9:20 am |
| arguing about 9 11 is like repeatedly bashing your head against a wall and waiting for unicorns and jesus to pop out of your ears |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 9:22 am |
| i dunno cripes ... there's more of a positive pay-off if jesus or unicorns come out of your ears... |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 9:22 am |
| unless jesus acts all uppitty ...nobody needs that... |
| cripes - 9/5/07, 9:24 am |
| probably. but it seems like everyone is looking for some definitive answer and no one will ever get
it. there are also pretty convincing arguments for both sides. what i really mean is take it to union square |
| RyanMcGinty - 9/5/07, 9:24 am |
| anything involving hitler being alive, especially in antarctica: The writings of Miguel Serrano, Savitri Devi and other proponents of Esoteric Nazism have spawned numerous later works connecting Aryan master race beliefs and Nazi escape scenarios with enduring conspiracy theories about hollow earth civilizations and shadowy new world orders.[citation needed] The book Arktos: The Polar Myth in Science, Symbolism, and Nazi Survival, by Hypnerotomachia Poliphili scholar Joscelyn Godwin, discusses pseudoscientific theories about surviving Nazi elements in Antarctica. Arktos is noted for its scholarly approach and examination of many sources currently unavailable elsewhere in English-language translations. Godwin and other authors such as Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke have discussed the connections between Esoteric Nazism and Vril energy, the hidden Shambhala and Agartha civilizations, and underground UFO bases, as well as Hitler’s supposed survival in Antarctic oases or in alliance with Hyperboreans from the subterranean world.[56] |
| cripes - 9/5/07, 9:25 am |
| also if jesus ever came out of my ears i would probably cage him and make him do neat things for me |
| cripes - 9/5/07, 9:26 am |
| uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh that did not come out as i intended |
| matthew - 9/5/07, 9:31 am |
| the guy that owns all those buildings admitted to pulling wtc7: right here isnt that what that .gif up there is of? wtc7? looks like a controlled demolition to me... |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 9:32 am |
| they do say that the lord works in mysterious ways... |
| cripes - 9/5/07, 9:35 am |
| yeshua can't really come to the phone right now .... |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 9:36 am |
| interesting, Matthew, I hadn't seen that. I'm more inclined to believe that Larry Silverstein
ordered the demo of one building for safety/insurance/whatever reasons. It doesn't really help the "inside job" folks, though. I guess I wonder with the owner openly saying that, why people are still saying "OH MAN IT WAS CONTROLLED..." as if it was a conspiracy? |
| matthew - 9/5/07, 9:43 am |
| well, apparently it takes a while (read: days) to set up a building for controlled demolition like that. although, im not particularly educated on demolition so i cant really say that with 100% accuracy. |
| diana - 9/5/07, 9:47 am |
| SHUT THE FUCK UP BITCH NO ONE WANTS TO HEAR YOUR FUCKIN' LIFE STORY |
| rhw - 9/5/07, 9:48 am |
| tinobeat - 09/05/07 at 04:36 pm (67.151.118.51) interesting, Matthew, I hadn't seen that. I'm more inclined to believe that Larry Silverstein ordered the demo of one building for safety/insurance/whatever reasons. It doesn't really help the "inside job" folks, though. I guess I wonder with the owner openly saying that, why people are still saying "OH MAN IT WAS CONTROLLED..." as if it was a conspiracy? It would be fine if they demo'd the building due to safety/insurance reasons Martin. But to try and keep that secret (if this is indeed what's happened) is insanity and will only lead to more and more conjecture about it. However, one of the key problems with WTC7 being demo'd for any reason is that, apparently, it takes a long time to prep a building for demolition. As in....longer than a day. So then you've got a whole new can of worms on your lap. |
| tinobeat - 9/5/07, 10:00 am |
| yeah, there's worms aplenty, I've never denied that. I hadn't heard that Larry Silverstein had openly said "pull it", I have no idea when that's from, today was the first I'd heard it. The weird thing is that it DOES take a long time to set that up, and its also a dangerous job that would not be so easy to do without being noticed by the thousands of people who work there every day. It would be hard to *secretly* set up a building that big for demolition. I would wonder what Larry Silverstein would say if someone were to ask him "when you said 'pull it', what are the chain of events your building managers/firefighters/whoever would go through in order to pull the building in a matter of a few hours?" So he could just be full of shit, or he could have just meant it in a "let it burn til it falls" sort of way. He actually holds a lot of answers. I'm not a LIHOP as much as agnostic LIHOP. Whether they knew or not, the government rode that wave and used it to enact policies they'd been wanting to enact for ages. It doesnt' follow that they would set up SUCH an elaborate thing that would require a cast of hundreds sworn to eternal secrecy, but it DOES follow that they could, possibly, have sworn a dozen or so people to secrecy about letting it happen. That's the fatal flaw in the BUSH DID IT idea. For it to be one single elaborate consipiracy, it would require SO many people keeping their mouths shut, I don't think its possible. The holes in the story could come from the subnarratives. Maybe Silverstein pulled some weird shit only he and a few of his people knew about once the planes hit. Maybe there were other shenanigans. But 4 planes full of passengers and 19 hijackers disappeared, and it makes much more sense that they disappeared into the 3 buildings they hit and the field one crashed in as opposed to them just vanishing into thin air while cruise missiles and C4 did what the planes could have done. The alternatives to 90% of the events proposed just don't pass the test. The only thing that's shady in any way to me is WTC7, but that seems like its just shadiness associated with Larry Silverman and The Port Authority. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 10:03 am |
| I am going to wager that no one that posts here is qualified in any way to critically analyze anything to determine whether it was a controlled demolition, or whether it was a building collapsing on itself, so really people need to stop saying "what it looks like to them" as if it means anything at all. |
| davidlopan - 9/5/07, 10:04 am |
| it looks like a mind yeti was summoned, went nuts and fucking leveled the place. to me. |
| iheartlawyers - 9/5/07, 10:05 am |
| looks to me like the work of some kind of sorcerer or possibly a mage of some kind. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 10:11 am |
| I don't think Larry Silverstein can just "order" his building demolished like that, which is why I really give that notion any credibility. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 10:14 am |
| *don't is the missing word I meant to put in my last post. |
| uallach - 9/5/07, 10:18 am |
| are you guys fucking serious about that youtube clip? i think he meant pull it as in "HEY GUYS STOP FIGHTING THE FIRE THIS BUILDING IS FUCKED" then he says they watched it fall down, i distinctly remember news reports all day saying that WTC 7 was on fire/heavily damaged. |
| uallach - 9/5/07, 10:20 am |
| ALSO IF A BUILDING IS PACKED WITH EXPLOSIVES IT PROBABLY WOULD HAVE GONE OFF EARLY AFTER BEING ON FUCKING FIRE ALL DAY |
| eric - 9/5/07, 10:27 am |
| The problem Dan, is that Uhuru2u doesn't think the building WAS on fire because he read something somewhere that the building was fine and I think it involved a theoretical physicist from BYU who talked to a firefighter or something on that day... |
| joedinkin - 9/5/07, 10:29 am |
| neopolitan: back in my impressionable youth (we're talking like 3rd and 4th grade) i used to read conspiracy theory usenet boards, like alt.conspiracies.ufos and alt.aliens.abductions and alt.talk.newworldorder and things like that. anyway, this one i read a few times and sort of stuck with me. the gist was: 1945: we drop the atomic bomb. the aliens (more advanced then us by a few hundred years, but not by thousands or anything) catch wind of this and want to talk 1947: the aliens crash land at area 51, crash in roswell. super advanced technology. by the early 1950s, the gov't (or maybe the shadow gov't) has reverse engineered some of the more primitive aspects of their technology. and by late1952, the first manned moon landing. eisenhower is totally in the dark. he has top level military security clearence, but doesn't even know where to look. the shadowier parts of the govt are increasingly working without the supervision of the gov't, and occaisionally butting heads with the emerging american military. in 1960, president kennedy is elected, and given top level military clearence. some general or another is getting antsy about the increasing disconnect and the failing chain of command and tips jfk off, and with his top security military clearence, he finds some old documents indicating that we'd landed on the moon. he flipped out. at first, he is going to go public with the whole thing, and tell the american people and the world what's up. the leaders of the increasingly shadowy govt talk him down off the ledge and tell him revealing the truth would result in global chaos, so finally they come to an agreement. The agreement was this: the shadow govt will gradually educate a select small group of scientists about some of the technologies, and then gradually reveal the truth over the next decade. they'd never admit they lied or had already landed on the moon, but they would gradually bring americans up to speed, so to speak, and do the process again and in public over the next decade. they agree in 1961, that jfk can give his famous speech about landing on the moon by the end of the decade, and they were going to play it out in public. However, some shadow govt types welched on the deal, and went forard with more research and experiments, out of public view. and in late 1962, they landed on mars. kennedy was livid. NOW he was gonna go public with everything, admit that there was a shadow govt operating that outside his authority, and they'd landed on the moon and now mars with alien technology. they tried to calm him down again, and they promised jfk that they'd reveal everything, slowly, over the next ten years. But one day in dallas, jfk was gonna tell all in a large televised public speech. so, the shadow govt couldn't let it happen and arranged to have him killed. lbj was never given the same kind of top-level security clearence as president had been before, and was totally in the dark -- and the shadow govt had gotten better about covering their tracks and distancing themselves from the operations of the real govt. the moon landing in '69 may or may not have been staged. and rfk was killed because he might have known something, but probably didn't. there are more details, but i forget. |
| eric - 9/5/07, 10:40 am |
| I'm pretty sure that my cats are conspiring to steal my identity. |
| iheartlawyers - 9/5/07, 10:41 am |
| mrs. feffenwiggles always looked a little shifty to me. |
| joedinkin - 9/5/07, 10:43 am |
| also, i think maybe the shadow govt founded the wto, and that bill clinton is one of the lizard
people from atlantis. no for real |
| matthew - 9/5/07, 2:10 pm |
| eric - 09/05/07 at 05:03 pm (68.236.79.4) I am going to wager that no one that posts here is qualified in any way to critically analyze anything to determine whether it was a controlled demolition, or whether it was a building collapsing on itself, so really people need to stop saying "what it looks like to them" as if it means anything at all. actually, i was told by a civil engineer that a building on fire collapsing on itself would not fall in that manner and that pretty much the only way to get a building to collapse straight downward like that is a controlled demolition. also, if you use logic and think about the physics involved, its unlikely that all the structural supports of a building would fail symmetrically at the same time because of a fire, y'know? |
| uallach - 9/5/07, 2:15 pm |
| occam's razor has grown dull |
| ultrapanda - 9/5/07, 2:23 pm |
| The Hope Conspiracy? IMAGE REMOVED - CLICK TO VIEW |
| eric - 9/5/07, 3:42 pm |
| matthew - 09/05/07 at 09:10 pm (24.60.249.250) eric - 09/05/07 at 05:03 pm (68.236.79.4) I am going to wager that no one that posts here is qualified in any way to critically analyze anything to determine whether it was a controlled demolition, or whether it was a building collapsing on itself, so really people need to stop saying "what it looks like to them" as if it means anything at all. actually, i was told by a civil engineer that a building on fire collapsing on itself would not fall in that manner and that pretty much the only way to get a building to collapse straight downward like that is a controlled demolition. So anyway matthew, I still stand by my initial point that, "I am going to wager that no one that posts here is qualified in any way to critically analyze anything to determine whether it was a controlled demolition, or whether it was a building collapsing on itself, so really people need to stop saying "what it looks like to them" as if it means anything at all." And really, I've spoken to quite a few structural Engineers, in fact a component of my job is coordinating with Structural Engineers for the project I'm on, and in casual conversations they've laughed hysterically at the notion that this was controlled demolition. also, if you use logic and think about the physics involved, its unlikely that all the structural supports of a building would fail symmetrically at the same time because of a fire, y'know? From the Popular mechanics article: NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse. Hmmm, they seem to be saying that the collapse was anything BUT symmetrical, In fact I don't know where you're getting the idea that I said the collapse was in anyway "symmetrical". |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 5:50 pm |
| Hmmm, they seem to be saying that the collapse was anything BUT symmetrical, In fact I don't know
where you're getting the idea that I said the collapse was in anyway "symmetrical". maybe from anything you said, but from the symmetrical way the structure fell, as documented with video? i mean, i'm no phd in phsyics or anything, but i think understanding the concept of symmetry doesn't require that. symmetry is a word with a definition that you can understand with a high school education: the correspondence in size, form, and arrangement of parts on opposite sides of a plane, line, or point; regularity of form or arrangement in terms of like, reciprocal, or corresponding parts. once again.... IMAGE REMOVED - CLICK TO VIEW symmetry right before your eyes. |
| uhuru2u - 9/5/07, 6:03 pm |
| there are four corners on the roof of that building that fall at almost an identical speed and
direction towards the earth. correspondence in size, form, and arrangement of parts on opposite
sides of a plane, line, or point; regularity of form or arrangement in terms of like, reciprocal, or
corresponding parts. symmetry. beautiful symmetry. its right there before your eyes, captured on
video. if you look at that video and you see symmetry you don't need to be an expert on demolition.
If you don't see symettry you need to point out, empirically, how one corner is responding
differently to the others and how symmetry doesn't exist. you can't just say "i have a phd in
physics and symmetry isn't happening and that's that." i love the internet. |
| its_snowing - 9/5/07, 6:13 pm |
| im meta-LOLing at the multi-dimensional preposterousness of uhuru2us arguments, but i appreciated the boyish doggedness with which he puts forth his arguments. but its bitter-sweet loling, as i am also saddenedby the fact that he is unable to see the jupiter-sized flaws in logic along with the holes in these arguments that are large enough to fly three jumbo jets filled with abducted airline passengers through. |
| its_snowing - 9/5/07, 6:15 pm |
| also, i guess if its on the internet somewhere, then its definitely an authoritative source and makes one better able to argue about architectural and static theories than, say, an actual architect citing other, actual architects. |
| matt-L - 9/5/07, 6:35 pm |
| uallach - 09/05/07 at 09:15 pm (209.6.145.15) occam's razor has grown dull |
| matt-L - 9/5/07, 6:37 pm |
| <y favorite is the one I made up about paul mccartney and the greek island of the decomissioned rockstars |
| SugeNate - 9/10/07, 9:54 am |
| this is a brand new one. i love it. CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY UNCOVERED IN NUCLEAR "MISTAKE"! SHIPMENT OF LIVE NUCLEAR WARHEADS FROM NORTH DAKOTA TO LOUISIANA WAS NO MISTAKE THE LIVE WARHEADS WERE REMOVED FROM THEIR SECURE NUCLEAR STORAGE SAFES AFTER ENTRY AND CONFIRMATION OF PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORIZATION! Reports that five nuclear warheads were "accidentally" shipped by B-52 from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota to Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana are false. It was no mistake; it was a criminal conspiracy to launch nuclear terrorist attacks against five U.S. cities! Military investigators have confirmed to The Hal Turner Show that President Bush's personal Presidential authorization code authorized the removal of five 150 kiloton nuclear warheads from their secure nuclear storage safes. Those Investigators also confirmed that the cruise missiles in which those warheads were placed, were mounted on the wings of the B-52 and not placed in the belly of the plane with other missiles headed for decommissioning. When those nuclear cruise missiles arrived at Barksdale AFB, Investigators say plans were made to move those warheads off the base, allowing them to be used for what was to be a massive, nuclear "terrorist" strike against five U.S. cities. They speculate the attacks would have been blamed on AL-Qaida and used as an excuse to impose Martial Law in the U.S.... |
| reply without loggin in ... or don't |
