Fandom Forums - View Single Post - The 9/11 Conspiracy
View Single Post
Old 10-21-2009, 03:05 PM   #132
Mal's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,090
Thanks: 12,723
Thanked 10,818 Times in 3,844 Posts
Mal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of light
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
It’s your argument that is flawed; you can't just simply negate my statement without producing any facts . The director of the original investigation (W. GEN CORLEY) revealed that it was the fire that followed the crash brought the two towers down.
Miburo did produce facts. or do you think it's impossible for a building to collapse without its support beams melting?

Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
1.) The North tower was hit first, then why did the South Tower was the first to collapse?
Oh shit guys! He found us out! Who would have guessed he'd know that, despite all probability, conditions in both towers were 100% identical‽‽‽

Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
As I said earlier, uncontrolled open fires like those of the WTC can’t generate enough heat to melt the steel trusses, frames and beams. Let me cite one very simply example for you; Gas Stove versus Steel Pot. You can cook all day without melting your steel pot even under the intense heat generated from the Gas stove. Where its controlled flame is far greater than those of the WTC.

This is not the first time the world saw a skyscraper inferno. The Madrid Skyscraper fire (Windsor Building), the 32 storey building that burnt for 10 hours.
This was the same level of fire can be seen at the WTC, but the building withstood the 10 hour blazing inferno. So what the hell happened at WTC??
Whether you like it or not there are Flame classification, depending on the fuel supplied. Colors of the flames, especially those controlled ones are indications of its heat energy.

Fires are normally use as colloquial terms for the general public to understand. Now, I hate to say this but your “I CANNOT SEE AIR” example is stupid or somehow slightly pathetic. Air itself is a combination of gases, and FYI there many types of gases. Before we go off –topic, I hope you know what is a Carbon Monoxide.
You're obviously incapable of recognizing a quality counter example.
My argument was exactly like yours. "I can't see something, therefore it does not exist." You assue that since only red/orange flames were seen, that no other flames existed. For centuries people only ever saw white swans, so they thought that all swans were white. However, if you go ask Zer0 (my favourite Aussie) what colour swans are, he'll tell you they're sometimes black.
Oh, and no I don't know what "is a carbon monoxide".

Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
Your theory only proves that the WTC should be a pancake collapse and not a total obliteration. FYI, the WTC had a structural core from its bedrock foundation to its roof. A 100 percent steel-framed, of which some larger columns measured 54 inches wide.

What happened to them? Even if there were tons of collapsing floors, the steel core will remaining standing.
The total potential energy of WTC1/2 was:

KE = (mv^2)/2 = (5,072,120kg x (63.93m/s)^2)/2 = 10,363,863,011J (average per floor)
110 floors * 10,362,544,260J = 1,139,879,868,600J (total)
1.1 trillion joules of energy is equivalent to 272 tons of TNT, meaning each tower had as much potential energy as a small nuclear warhead, and you want to believe the central columns would have survived that?

Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
This is a conspiracy to victimize US itself and it involves a lot of powerful people both in and out of the Government sector. As a matter of fact they placed the entire building under full coverage maintenance 2 weeks prior the claimed attack. Surveillance cameras were turned-off during the entire maintenance program.

Later I will share some of photos I gathered.
First, was it two weeks or five days? Get your "facts" straight.
Second, "a conspiracy to victimize the US?" Surely there must have been easier alternatives than this absurdly complex "plan".
Mal is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Mal For This Useful Post:
Azumi (10-21-2009), mewmew (10-21-2009), Miburo (10-21-2009), zer0systm (10-22-2009)