the "no plane" theory

[Blackhawk2001]

Wait... so you are telling that to take down the building in a controlled demolition, you have to destroy the outer structure... but in the same breath say that to take down the towers you merely have to heat the inner core with jet fuel?

What I find interesting is that you speak about the collapse with certainty and simplicity... and I won't won't discredit your experience in the Indiana US&R Taskforce, so please don't take this as being disrespectful, but you are basically saying to everyone here... "I watched it on tv and therefore I know with certainty exactly what happened... and believe me because I took a few training lessons in this stuff at the Indiana US&R Taskforce."

There are many of very credentialed engineers who have done more than simply watch the collapse on tv 12 years ago who would disagree with your conclusion.

Here is one example (of many) here for reference: This guy obviously spent many hours searching through the details... maybe more hours than the guys who put out the "official report".

[video=youtube_share;z8W-t57xnZg]http://youtu.be/z8W-t57xnZg[/video]

My point being... there are a lot of well thought out and researched opinions on what likely happened that day. They range from terrorists flying planes into buildings all the way to Illuminati puppet masters setting up controlled demolitions and all stops in between. I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but the truth is in there somewhere and you won't find it if you speak in absolutes or if you immediately discount all possibilities but one.

The guys from the 9/11 Commissions don't even speak in absolutes and have admitted to only getting partial evidence.

Yep, mighty tough to sift through tons of concrete dust. HOWEVER, I'm going by the least hypothesis here: thousands of people watched the jets fly into the World Trade Center Towers 1 & 2. No "doctored" film footage can change that. Video evidence, damage reports during the attempted evacuations of the towers, and eye-witness reports all attest to the amount of damage done to the upper structures of both buildings. Temperatures of the fires were not limited to the burning temperature of jet fuel, according to fire and materiels experts. Weakening of the outer and inner structures was sufficient to cause the weight of the stories above the damaged sections to give way, causing a collapse straight down.

Theories of demolition of the structure betray little knowledge of the way building demolition is conducted.

So we have one theory that accounts for all the observed data and expected results, and we have another theory which requires substantial prior preparation, and a massive conspiracy which has betrayed not one leak in 12 years. I'll stick with the simpler theory, you can have the massive conspiracy if you want.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Ah, the most secure airspace in the world. How exactly is this airspace secured and why is it the most secure in the world? Is there a force field that keeps airplanes out? Your arguments are ludicrous and I will be so blunt, because I do know what I'm talking about.

We have seen F-16's fly right up next to a grandfather and grandson flying a small plane within minutes of them getting to far over the river in that area, but we could not get a single F-16 anywhere close to NY or the Pentagon.

 

[BravoMike]

We have seen F-16's fly right up next to a grandfather and grandson flying a small plane within minutes of them getting to far over the river in that area, but we could not get a single F-16 anywhere close to NY or the Pentagon.

Was this before or after 9/11? Did they have their transponders on or off like the terrorists? Good honest people who unintentionally make a mistake are easy to catch. Also, I'm not sure what your point is.

Also IIRC, fighters were scrambled after primary radar returns were spotted and presumed to be AA77. A Cessna doing 120 kts is a lot easier to catch up to than a 767 doing 530 kts.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Was this before or after 9/11? Did they have their transponders on or off like the terrorists? Good honest people who unintentionally make a mistake are easy to catch. Also, I'm not sure what your point is.

Before 9/11. 3-4 jets with transponders off is common? Seems like that would be cause for alarm.

 

[BravoMike]

Before 9/11. 3-4 jets with transponders off is common? Seems like that would be cause for alarm.

ANY aircraft in DC airspace without a transponder on is cause for alarm. It is in the SFAR that ALL aircraft in their airspace have the transponders on with altitude reporting. They must also be on a flight plan and in communication with ATC.

Not sure if you are wanting me to clarify or if there is a point.

 

[BravoMike]

Let's not forget that a Cessna 150 hit the front lawn of the White House with target being the White House itself. Is it so hard to believe that an aircraft with a top speed of 105 kts could hit he front lawn, but an Airliner doing 530 kts couldn't possible get to the Pentagon? Or was that a government conspiracy as well?

Frank Eugene Corder - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Sainte]

Dont forget about building 7.
Must have been a couple hundred flaming post-it notes that caused that puppy to pancake.

this is the one that gives rise to ALL my doubts about the official 9/11 story. I will even buy that there is NO video to be had of the plane hitting the pentagon as the govt may want to keep all those angles that are filmed secret, who knows. But seriously, NO ONE can NOR have they explained the collapse of Bldg 7. It was hit by a nose landing gear, (2000 lbs at most?) no way that would bring down an entire bldg in its own footprint.

also, wasn't there an entire floor of Bldg 7 given over to the .gov for many months for "remodeling".

 

[HeadlessRoland]

After reading through these 7 pages and watching the entire video the OP posted, I can say this thread has been "hijacked"...sorry for the terrible pun.

If (IF) the video evidence the guy shows in the OP is correct and was actually shown the way he present's in the video then he certainly raised some very valid questions. Non of which have been addressed in this thread. The video did not deal at all with how the buildings fell, or why they fell like they did...just what hit the videos and what we were shown.

I think some of the "camera tricks" the director of the video shows can most likely be explained by people who actually know stuff about digital photography/videography in 2001. I know nothing of the sort...however, when he was pointing out the different trajectories of the planes in the videos from very similar angles of view, that was suspicious as hell (again assuming he did not screw with the footage). The other thing that was really strange was the bridge in the background being 7.2 miles away or something like that and showing the footage played by several media outlets and how the bridge was related to the towers...there were several other points raised in the video about shadows and lighting and comparing frames of one video to another and how certain things didn't appear to "line up" as well as one would expect...Interesting points that I certainly haven't ever seen answered (not that I have ever really tried to look into them)

I've never put much effort into the 911 conspiracies except for the missile hitting the Pentagon theory. I always thought it just made sense a building built like the towers would fall straight down if the top portion was significantly weakened...Like I said the guy making the video did raise some interesting points I have never thought about and have never heard addressed before, but again I have never gone out of my way to look into these things.

Wow. Did you seriously make a 9-11 pun?

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Dont forget about building 7.
Must have been a couple hundred flaming post-it notes that caused that puppy to pancake.

Yeah, it's not as though being in very close proximity to a destructing building could possibly knock down other buildings.
I'll go let those guys in Vegas know to stop being so careful with the demo explosives, since there's nothing to worry about. The casino owners will be so relieved to hear this!

 

[zippy23]

If you ask me, the real questions shouldnt be about the twin towers, it should be the other building that miraculously fell as well, blamed on "fires started from falling debris." Then when you realize what was in those buildings that fell, thats where it gets real fishy to me. Building have fires, for other buildings pretty far away from the twin towers catching fire and falling demolition style, that seems way out there, plus when eye witnesses hear booms from the basement of one of the towers and in the videos you see small explosions out the sides of the buildings way below the impact site of the planes, that seems very very fishy as well.

 

[Sainte]

If you ask me, the real questions shouldnt be about the twin towers, it should be the other building that miraculously fell as well, blamed on "fires started from falling debris." Then when you realize what was in those buildings that fell, thats where it gets real fishy to me. Building have fires, for other buildings pretty far away from the twin towers catching fire and falling demolition style, that seems way out there, plus when eye witnesses hear booms from the basement of one of the towers and in the videos you see small explosions out the sides of the buildings way below the impact site of the planes, that seems very very fishy as well.

In the beginning of your post, you are referring to Bldg 7. There is/was no reason in heII why that bldg went down. If, as suggested by another member it was due to the proximity of the Twins, why was it the only other bldg that went down and why was it left out of the official report?

there are many older, less structurally engineered bldgs in that area, why did a modern bldg go down, demolition style and no others?

The .gov had a VERY long time inside the bldg that went down remodeling a few floors for .gov offices yet, a 2000lbs nose landing gear took down the entire bldg?

i am not even thinking bout the Twins, the Pentagon or the planes. My MAIN and overriding concern is with Bldg 7. You solve that mystery, you find that answer and you answer all of the 9/11 attacks.

do I think 20 Saudis acted alone? HeII no.
do I think .gov or even the Israelis "nudged", guided from a distance or influenced choices, decisions or even made possible some things for the attacks to take place? Well, that remains to be seen.

i am usually not a conspiracy guy as I subscribe more to Occam's Razor in all things but, there is just too much left unexplained about Bldg 7.

 

[Denny347]

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics

WTC Disaster Study

LSDYNA Physics-based model of the collapse initiation of WTC 7

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

 

[atvdave]

Well if Rosie O'Donnell says it was a US Gov. conspiracy then it must be true?

 

[jbombelli]

The topic of this thread is easily in the top ten stupidest things I've ever read on the internet.

Congratulations.

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

With how many rights we have lost, and how much power the .gov has gained from/since the attacks. I find it hard to believe the gov didnt have a hand in this. Hopefully im wrong as i hate to think they would do this for any reason

 

[Bummer]

With how many rights we have lost, and how much power the .gov has gained from/since the attacks. I find it hard to believe the gov didnt have a hand in this. Hopefully im wrong as i hate to think they would do this for any reason

I can't buy "had a hand in", real conspiracies never last unless everybody dies. People just like to talk too much. However, take advantage of after the fact? Oh yeah! Politicians (and their ilk) never let a perfectly good tragedy go to waste.

 

[dirtfarmerz]

With how many rights we have lost, and how much power the .gov has gained from/since the attacks. I find it hard to believe the gov didnt have a hand in this. Hopefully im wrong as i hate to think they would do this for any reason

They needed the Patriot Act. It's all about control. BHO ran for office telling us that he'd be different than Bush, but he actually does the same things. BHO wants a civilian force equal to our military in order to achieve the security objectives they've set. This is the same government that tried to limit the 2A with Fast & Furious, then they used the NSA, IRS, EPA, and other government agencies to punish their enemies. The senior republicans told us that Snowden was a traitor and the NSA is protecting us. Bush and Obama have signed executive orders prepping for martial law. The National Defense Resources Preparedness Order was signed March 16th. Obamacare will give them control over us more than the Patriot Act. I have mentioned this next one several times and I'll keep doing it until they come for us; The DHS has Evangelical Christians listed in the #1 spot on the terrorist watch list. It is even more strange if you consider that they mention if people believe in end-time prophesies, they could be terrorists. We don't bother anyone and if we are a bunch of nut-jobs, why not just leave us to our fantasies? They have an agenda and they won't stop.

The people in the first link saw planes. They also said the tower's bottom floors blew up. Some of the firefighters said they heard the explosions at the base of the towers.
911 WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ?? See with your own eyes - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRC4lCQuBmc

Barry Jennings was in Bldg 7 when the bottom floors exploded. He said there were dead bodies in Bldg 7, but the official story said nobody died in Bldg 7. Barry Jennings died two days before the official story was released.
9/11 Key Witness Murdered? - YouTube

Molten steel at the base of the towers.
Molten Metal - a 9/11 Smoking Gun: Cutter Charges and WTC Cut Columns - Look at the columns. You don't have to be an engineer to see something is wrong.
Molten Steel and 9/11: The existence and implications of molten steel in "the pile"., page 1 - "They" removed the video from this link that shows a government official saying there was no molten steel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tw4_-4xGuHA
High Temperatures, Persistent Heat & 'Molten Steel' at WTC Site Contradict Official Story

More Information:
911 Was an Inside Job!
http://www.toronto911truth.com/flyer1back.pdf

 

[BlaineBug]

We all know that planes hit Tower 1 and 2. We saw the footage. The French documentary footage contained the first impact, and live news footage contained the second impact.

However, about the controlled demolition of WTC 7.....and the crash site in the field....

And most suspiciously, the perfect hole in the pentagon.

 

[Libertarian01]

To All,

I was watching a documentary a long time ago that explained that the reason many people buy into, or hold onto, a conspiracy theory is that they elevate their own sense of self importance or self esteem. They "KNOW" something the rest of us do not, and if they illuminate the secret for us they become the hero. In reality they are looking for "secrets" to reveal where no secrets exist.

I would venture a guess that some CIA or true Special Ops feel this way, knowing something the rest of us do not know, and what they know is "important." Yet with the light of history most of their secrets are revealed.

The problem is not with looking to uncover the truth which a a noble cause, but rather in clinging to a "possible" explanation when it has clearly been proven false. Many conspiracy theories take the model that if no obvious explanation for an event occurs then THEIR EXPLANATION MUST BE TRUE. This is a logical fallacy. Just because we don't know who disappeared Mr. Hoffa does NOT mean we get to insert our own personal villain du jour as the obvious answer.

Not all mysteries can be explained 100% to most people. I certainly do not know engineering, so if an engineer explains to me how the WTC buildings would collapse I must question their motives. In the vast majority of cases any structural engineer or architect has zero (0) motive to mislead me, so I can go with the general explanation.

The fact is that some conspiracies do occur. The Lindbergh kidnapping (presuming more than one person was involved.) The disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa. The CIAs attempt to assassinate Castro. However, these are acknowledged by most of the general public as a potential conspiracy and we know they may never be solved. Add to this the fact that out of these three (3) examples two (2) were known from the very beginning to be a conspiracy - Lindbergh & Hoffa. Only later did the Castro assassination attempts come to light, but come to light they did.

We may never know the complete story of the WTC attack, but we do have a good idea of who, what, where, when and why. Not a perfect understanding, but a good one.

Regards,

Doug

 

[indyjack]

The topic of this thread is easily in the top ten stupidest things I've ever read on the internet.

Congratulations.

do you seriously have nothing better to do than to look at threads you think are stupid just so you can tell everyone how stupid you think they are? i wish i had that much spare time...