PE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> Your 9-11 conspiracy thread

AuthorTopic: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread  (Read 40035 times)

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #60 on: September 13, 2012, 12:45:05 AM »
Impossible G forces for B767
Impossible G forces for B767
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline g

  • Golden Oxen
  • Contrarian
  • Master Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 12280
    • View Profile
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #61 on: September 13, 2012, 01:00:38 AM »
" Quote Agelbert"This is the lady that convinced me that there NEVER was an Arab terrorist threat on US territory (outside the US, on Arab soil, there definitely was/is and she made the statement that US aggression would spur it.). Her name is Susan Lindauer. She was a CIA asset. That means she was a go-between".

Thanks again Agelbert, spell binding material, ashamed at myself for never hearing of this women until your posting tonight. Just finished the videos and was struck by here wonderful personality after what she has been put through. Her summation of the entire situation and who was responsible in two words, "Halliburton and Greed", hardly sound like the words from a crazy woman. I am currently reading all the links about her on Wiki, an honor graduate of Smith college and the London School of Economics that is supposed to be daft, what a friggin joke.

This Dr Fuisz is the key to it all and her second cousin Andrew Card sure manages to distance himself from it all while receiving all the correspondence. 

How I wish we had a real press and real journalists to do some top notch investigating of this type of material. It has all been dismissed by most familiar with it as the rantings of another loony tune. How sad! Thanks again AG

Offline reanteben

  • Global Moderator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
    • View Profile
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #62 on: September 13, 2012, 10:42:19 AM »
surly said:

Quote
It may be that scalar weaponry is so exotic that no one knows enough to venture an opinion.

no doubt. but the beauty of the woodian approach is that it is evidence-based. the physical evidence eliminates, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the possibility of it having gone down the way the architects and engineers would have it. so the key to this onion is not to get caught up in the exotic -- wood herself doesn't even speculate on the method beyond what the evidence indicates (hutchison effect, other physical anomalies [bizarre car damage, etc]) -- but to focus on the evidence so that the leninist 'control both sides' tactic is exposed (as with the grassy knoll).

here's another quote (good to have you back, karpatok):
Quote
Karellen paused, and the silence grew even deeper.

"There has been some complaint, among the younger and more romantic elements of your population, because outer space has been closed to you. We had a purpose in doing this: we do not impose bans for the pleasure of it. But have you ever stopped to consider -- if you will excuse a slightly unflattering analogy -- what a man from your Stone Age would have felt, if he suddenly found himself in a modern city?"

"Surely," protested the Herald Tribune, "there is a fundamental difference. We are accustomed to Science. On your world there are doubtless many things which we might not understand -- but they wouldn't seem magic to us."

"Are you quite sure of that?" said Karellen, so softly that it was hard to hear his words. "Only a hundred years lies between the age of electricity and the age of steam, but what would a Victorian engineer have made of a television set or an electronic computer. And how long would he have lived if he started to investigate their workings? The gulf between two technologies can easily become so great that it is -- lethal."

From Childhood's End by Arthur C. Clarke (1953)  ❞




Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #63 on: September 13, 2012, 02:02:10 PM »
Golden Oxen,
You are always welcome.

Reanteben,
Maxwell perfected the wave function equations. He did not understand or predict quantum entanglement, the connotations of the double slit experiment (reality is a multiverse) or the many uses the knowledge of matter routinely entering and exiting this universe at the quantum level has on material science and weaponry. Vibratory weapons require high energy levels. The big, big problem with the scalar weapon hypothesis on the twin towers is the MOTIVE for bringing them down (using a new Pearl Harbor pretext to get more Middle East oil resources locked down). IF we had such weaponry with massive and unlimited energy at our disposal to power them, THEN we would have no need of foreign oil resources and no need to dustify the towers. Any crime requires three things:
1) Motive
2) Opportunity
3) Ability

With scalar weaponry there is no motive.

You said:
Quote
...a couple weeks ago and mentioned judy wood, who believes from the physical evidence that the towers were "dustified" -- disintegrated, in other words -- by a scalar weapon. the most obvious clues being the manner in which the towers came apart, and the lack of a rubble pile that should have been some 15 stories high. she has three interviews spanning eight hours at Veritas. there are many other bizarre facts surrounding 9/11 that she covers exhaustively at her website:

http://www.drjudywood.com/

also, unlike bill morgan, above, she does not believe that aluminum planes could penetrate a concrete and steel building. she notes in particular that one of the wtc towers had an imprint of where the wing entered all the way out to the wingtip. at the tip the cutout from the wingtip penetration was just five inches tall. how could an aluminum wingtip penetrate such concrete and/or steel? it seems impossible in my mind. she does not speculate beyond that and therefore does not theorize on the film footage of the planes.


1. Visual information is not forensic evidence needed to confirm dustification. The proven nanothermite composition of some hastily gathered dust after the towers came down is all the physical evidence we have. WHY? Because EXACTLY the same corporation hired to clean up the debris after Oklahoma City is the one that carted EVERYTHING away as fast as possible. Now that is one hell of a coincidence, don't you think? After the crime of the century, no attempt is made by the gooberment to preserve the evidence (violating a slew of US laws by destroying evidence).
Quote
Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction of Flushing, New York, told AFP that he saw pools of "literally molten steel" at the World Trade Center. Tully was contracted on September 11 to remove the debris from the site.

Tully called Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland, for consultation about removing the debris. CDI calls itself "the innovator and global leader in the controlled demolition and implosion of structures."

Loizeaux, who cleaned up the bombed Federal Building in Oklahoma City, arrived on the WTC site two days later and wrote the clean-up plan for the entire operation. 
http://911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html


2. The rubble pile height is a strawman. The achitects and engineers for 911, unlike Dr. Judy Wood, have a wealth of data on the way structural matter piles up in a controlled demolition. In any event, a visual of a pile of dust and other debris is not physical evidence of scalar weaponry.

3. About the effects of aluminum on concrete and steel: An aircraft has a lot of soft parts but it has parts (landing gear, engines and wing spar and frame members) made of materials equal to (wing spar and framing) or much stronger (engine and landing gear) than anything used to construct a building. The archititects that designed the twin towers figured that into the building design strength. Add strength to inertia and you have some massive penetration power. Even without strength, such as is the case with aluminum, the Good Dr. Judy Wood is misunderstanding some real world data on aircraft design. An airplane's GREATEST STRENGTH is in the wing spar and structural components. The aluminum skin is there for aerodynamics but that wing is like a bridge that supports the aircraft at up to 2.5 Gs plus and 1 G minus. The wing has to routinely remain flexible (to a point) and hold 2.5 times the weight of the aircraft off and on. When the wing hits a building, the effect of the aluminum skin is negligible (depending on the strike angle). It's the structural members of titanium underneath that have punching power.

One more thing. High velocity can do amazing things with otherwise weak materials. Hurricane winds from Andrew never got to more than 160 mph. The aluminum structure of the aircraft was moving at 450 mph PLUS when it hit the WTC.


This is a weak piece of plywood striking a much stronger and denser tree trunk at a maximum of 150 mph


Two by four penetrates a much denser palm tree trunk during a hurricane




« Last Edit: September 13, 2012, 03:14:35 PM by agelbert »
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline reanteben

  • Global Moderator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
    • View Profile
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #64 on: September 13, 2012, 02:37:14 PM »
Reanteben,
The issue of all the details as to how the buildings were brought down is certainly worth study. Architects and Engineers for 911 are doing just that.



However, I agree with Surly1 on this:
Quote
On one thing we can probably agree: that 9-11 was indeed PNAC's coveted "New Pearl Harbor," which led to total war on the Bill of Rights and the common people of the FSA. Would that the Fourth Amendment had as well-organized and well-funded a defense lobby as the Second.

Since your father was CIA, have you asked him what he thinks?
Was your father in field operations or based at Langley doing analysis?
The CIA is highly compartmentalized and operates on the "Need to know" principle so, unless your father was in a foreign country doing field work for the Directorate of Operations, he would not be any more knowledgeable about 9/11 than the average citizen. Then again, if he knew something that compromised the "company" (inside parlance for the CIA), he would never tell you. That's just the way they operate. Read "Neck Deep" by Robert Parry for some CIA modus operandi background. :(

While we are on the subject of 911, I'd like to mention a deliberate distraction that was put out there when people began questioning the wacky conspiracy theory the gooberment and media were shoving down our throats (19 punks with single engine Cessna flying skills did the whole caper).

A team of propagandists put out the bullshit that there were NO aircraft hitting the buildings. They claimed what we saw were holograms. They ran a credible scam but, like a magician, they made people look in the wrong place so as to confuse the issue. When someone wants you to "look" with just your eyes, you get fooled as long as you don't "look" with any other senses. It was really quite clever. People had figured out that the planes DID NOT bring down those towers.

So-o-o-o the propagandists, in an attempt to discredit the people alleging that the twin towers were destroyed by explosives, not airplanes, made the ridiculous argument that there were NO AIRPLANES!


Reapeat after me: That's a hologram, not an airplane, you are getting very sleepy. When you awake you will remember that Slavery is Freedom

Of course there was an army of naysayers on the internet saying how the Arab baddies were out to get us and doubting the gooberment was treason or "unpatriotic". The line about "we must trust the government because Bush and Cheney know things we don't" by people like Pat Boone was echoed throughout the internet as well. The propagandists were working the "problem" of people out there using critical thinking skills from several directions.

When I read the hologram hypothesis, I thought about it. I fell in to the trap because I watched those buildings come down like they were riding a down elevator. It was obvious the aircraft didn't do that because the top parts would have fallen asymmetrically rather than in their footprint. As a matter of fact, the first building DID lurch a little (about 15 feet) to one side before it came down minutes later. I believe the boyz running the charges from building seven said we better bring this sucker down NOW before the top 20 something floors or so lurch off to the side and take out some buildings we don't want taken out.

Back to the hologram hypothesis. I saw the accidental 911 documentary from the French Camera team that had been working with some Fire Department nearby. They heard the noise and filmed the first impact. Then it hit me. The NOISE. Sound waves from a moving jet aircraft produce a Doppler effect. It is impossible for a hologram to generate a Doppler effect ALL OVER NEW YORK CITY. Sure, you can do it in a movie theater but that was not a movie theater. Just as you hear the sound pitch of an approaching object climb, so you hear it descend as the Doppler effect spaces the sound waves farther and farther apart. You can clearly here the sound of the engines of a jet moving AWAY from the camera's position as it approaches the building.

The hologram hypothesis is disinformation and FURTHER PROOF that the oil oligarchy that runs the USA will spend money, a lot of money, to pull the wool over people's eyes.

Reanteben, it has been 11 years. There is only one thing you or anyone else needs to ask about 9/11.

CUI BONO?
I agree with Surly1 as to who benefited.

thanks, agelbert.
in the dustification thread I posted a video of the top of tower 2 clearly falling outside of the outer walls

(before dustifying), which is contrary to what you stated. why don't you check it out (again?) and tell me what you see:






http://www.doomsteaddiner.net/forum/index.php?topic=277.msg1915#msg1915

what do you think of my physical analysis in the thread, including the plane-into-building  dynamicI consider it CFS but i'd prefer to be stood corrected because i'd rather the Conduits fail than the permanent oligarchy parlay their shit into a hunger games control system (HGCS).

my conception of the hologram theory (which i'm open to) is inclusive of the doppler effect heard in the frenchy documentary (illuminati mockumentary?  check out this article by dirdy birdy's alter:  http://www.serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm) because the a missile with 3D projectors would also create a doppler effect. so what was it, exactly, that caused you to dismiss it as disinfo? what makes the hologram theory disinfo, in order to discredit by association the architects and engineers, as you suggest, instead of the architects and engineers narrative being disinfo so as to discredit the hologram theory? it seems to me that steering people away from ZPE weaponry would be more important than steering them away from conventional weaponry, because it's not like 40pc or whatever of the domestic pop aren't already disbelieving the warren commission 2.0. know what i'm saying?
 furthermore, A&E serves to funnel the relatively independently minded academics into a false choice saturated with a polarized with group-think - a subpole of the Regulating Group-Mind.

judy wood was treated extremely poorly by steven jones and others at A&E when she approached them in 2005 (i think it was). soon after that her young assistant was murdered and she herself threatened. how cliche, it all probably sounds a bit too much but there it is; I really like her in her interviews, she's unpolished but full of integrity.

as for the cui bono business - we all know who benefits, all the time, from this infernal bitch called civilization. the salient point for me is that the motherfuckers have free energy.

as for my dad, he was stationed in northern CA at the time. I don't believe he knows about it but I can't know for sure. his work was hypercompartmentalized as his boss didn't even know what he was working on. as you can imagine his career choice and  his anmd my mom's continued lib-dem allegiance to it turns my stomach. we don't speak much these days.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2012, 03:15:34 PM by agelbert »

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #65 on: September 13, 2012, 05:06:28 PM »
Reanteben,
Thanks for the reply.
Civilization is a large subject area that many of us here have discussed in depth and agree has a lot of endemic destructive inertia for Homo sapiens and the biosphere. However, the battle of the empires for turf is what the wtc towers were all about. If we have free energy, dumping the towers was illogical. Predators may be murderers and thieves but they always act out of logical motives.

I watched the video. I have watched many videos of the towers fall. I have carefully observed the top 20 or so floors on one tower begin to fall  while the rest is NOT falling. I also observe that, just as in WTC 7, the center structure (in this case the antenna tower) falls into the buiding BEFORE the floors begin to collapse. This is TEXTBOOK demolition. A total vibratory attack would produce symmetrical disintegration (you CAN observe the effects of theoretical scalar weapon by placing an aircraft model in a wind tunnel and exceeding VNE -never exceed speed - the aircraft disintegrates from extreme vibrations). Do you agree that the pentagon attacks were linked? I do. The US government does too. Why didn't they "dustify" the Pentagon and WTC 7 too? While we are at it, why bother when you can create earthquakes in Baghdad (complete with dustified Saddam castles) or any place else and then race in like a "humanitarian rescue" operation and take over. That's the smoothest imperial takedown anyone would want! IF we had scalar weapons, we would DEFINITELY employ this quick and dirty strategy. Plausible deniability is important in power politics. If we could deny that we were attacking a country because we were "rescuing" it, we would do so. Hell, we tried with the "bringing Democracy" horseshit! In-your-face evil is bad politics (see blaming the Ai-rabs at one end and the scalar weapon Illuminati at the other - gotta cover all the bases, ya know!).
Darth Vader personalities don't sell worth a shit.

You can't flip the Architects and Engineers who are assuming NOTHING and blaming NOBODY for the destruction of the WTC buildings beyond "the planes couldn't do it" physics into some sort of groupthink phenomenon. Everything they have done is REJECT gooberment groupthink on the wacky "19 punks did it" bullshit story GROUPTHINKED onto we-the-people by the media propagandists. If there is an attempt to discredit the totally science based approach of the architects and engineers for 9/11, it is a gooberment funded disinformation campain, period.

I repeat, you cannot simulate the Doppler phenomenon. Claiming a hologram doppler generator effect is not science. RE, how about some help here? This is science.


How Dr. Judy Wood was treated by anyone out there is not at issue here. If she can present PHYSICAL evidence of scalar weaponry effects beyond the interpretation of the dust produced during the tower destruction, it will be looked at. Remember that she has a hypothesis. Very well, if you have a hypothesis, it means you set out to conclusively prove or disprove your hypothesis by a series of tests. An extreme pulverization of steel, concrete and other building structures would leave chemical traces WITHOUT nanothermite or any other explosive traces. The tiny particle size is not sufficient to prove the theory. She needs mass spectrometer analysis of the dust. Scientists don't give a fuck about egos. They only care about evidence proving or disproving a hypothesis. 

Don't confuse the architects and engineers, all serious professionals, with Prisonplanet host Alex Jones or any other talk show host out there; they are literally not on the same planet. Alex may be right in a lot of his Illuminati conspiracy views but that doesn't have beans to do with the scientific investigation of the WTC destruction. Putting them together does, however, lower the street cred of the Architects and Engineers for 9/11. Who do you think benefits from that besides the gooberment out to deep six the truth?

Why would you send a, from your point of view as stated recently, inaccurate view of the events  on 9/11 to someone you barely communicate with? My old man was an Army officer. After I left West Point, we didn't get along AT ALL. When one of my brothers (the one from the beach) tried to scam me into refinancing a property under inheritance (my mom's legacy), the old man calls me to get me to sign because of all the "help" he had given me and because he was my FATHER. I told him the only thing he had ever given ME was hepatitis that he carried from Korea. That was a bit of hyperbole because he always did put food on the table and provide a roof but I knew he was in on the refi scam that would have left me with the debt and my brother with the money. One time that same brother pulled a practical joke on him in a board game, the old man, not knowing who did it (neither my brother or myself were participating in the game), got up, went to his bedroom and returned and pulled a gun on me. He never apologized to me when my other brother quickly stepped in to claim he had done the prank. What I'm trying to tell you as that when someone loves war, killing and doesn't give shit about anything but power, their behavior ALWAYS defends power, not truth or logic. He didn't give a shit who died in 9/11. He thought Vietnam was a turkey shoot! If you think anyone working in the CIA is different from my old man, you are sadly mistaken.

Dr. judy Wood's view of the physics involving aircraft impacting a structure is unscientific. If she can't do the structural engineering math to compute  shear, compression and torsion stresses from high speed objects made of various materials impacting concrete and steel, she is NOT a scientist.

You would do better to dwell specifically on the stock price of Lockheed Martin, the growth of Mossad influence on our mushrooming security apparatus and the trillions of dollars thrown at OFFENSE weapons contractors than trying to generalize cui bono on our entire, admittedly, destructive human civilization. That too, is a distraction and a strawman. Only the guilty benefit from deflecting people from the truth.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2012, 05:13:44 PM by agelbert »
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline reanteben

  • Global Moderator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
    • View Profile
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #66 on: September 13, 2012, 05:27:40 PM »
Golden Oxen,
You are always welcome.

Reanteben,
Maxwell perfected the wave function equations. He did not understand or predict quantum entanglement, the connotations of the double slit experiment (reality is a multiverse) or the many uses the knowledge of matter routinely entering and exiting this universe at the quantum level has on material science and weaponry. Vibratory weapons require high energy levels. The big, big problem with the scalar weapon hypothesis on the twin towers is the MOTIVE for bringing them down (using a new Pearl Harbor pretext to get more Middle East oil resources locked down). IF we had such weaponry with massive and unlimited energy at our disposal to power them, THEN we would have no need of foreign oil resources and no need to dustify the towers. Any crime requires three things:
1) Motive
2) Opportunity
3) Ability

With scalar weaponry there is no motive.

You said:
Quote
...a couple weeks ago and mentioned judy wood, who believes from the physical evidence that the towers were "dustified" -- disintegrated, in other words -- by a scalar weapon. the most obvious clues being the manner in which the towers came apart, and the lack of a rubble pile that should have been some 15 stories high. she has three interviews spanning eight hours at Veritas. there are many other bizarre facts surrounding 9/11 that she covers exhaustively at her website:

http://www.drjudywood.com/

also, unlike bill morgan, above, she does not believe that aluminum planes could penetrate a concrete and steel building. she notes in particular that one of the wtc towers had an imprint of where the wing entered all the way out to the wingtip. at the tip the cutout from the wingtip penetration was just five inches tall. how could an aluminum wingtip penetrate such concrete and/or steel? it seems impossible in my mind. she does not speculate beyond that and therefore does not theorize on the film footage of the planes.


1. Visual information is not forensic evidence needed to confirm dustification. The proven nanothermite composition of some hastily gathered dust after the towers came down is all the physical evidence we have. WHY? Because EXACTLY the same corporation hired to clean up the debris after Oklahoma City is the one that carted EVERYTHING away as fast as possible. Now that is one hell of a coincidence, don't you think? After the crime of the century, no attempt is made by the gooberment to preserve the evidence (violating a slew of US laws by destroying evidence).
Quote
Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction of Flushing, New York, told AFP that he saw pools of "literally molten steel" at the World Trade Center. Tully was contracted on September 11 to remove the debris from the site.

Tully called Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland, for consultation about removing the debris. CDI calls itself "the innovator and global leader in the controlled demolition and implosion of structures."

Loizeaux, who cleaned up the bombed Federal Building in Oklahoma City, arrived on the WTC site two days later and wrote the clean-up plan for the entire operation. 
http://911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html


2. The rubble pile height is a strawman. The achitects and engineers for 911, unlike Dr. Judy Wood, have a wealth of data on the way structural matter piles up in a controlled demolition. In any event, a visual of a pile of dust and other debris is not physical evidence of scalar weaponry.

3. About the effects of aluminum on concrete and steel: An aircraft has a lot of soft parts but it has parts (landing gear, engines and wing spar and frame members) made of materials equal to (wing spar and framing) or much stronger (engine and landing gear) than anything used to construct a building. The archititects that designed the twin towers figured that into the building design strength. Add strength to inertia and you have some massive penetration power. Even without strength, such as is the case with aluminum, the Good Dr. Judy Wood is misunderstanding some real world data on aircraft design. An airplane's GREATEST STRENGTH is in the wing spar and structural components. The aluminum skin is there for aerodynamics but that wing is like a bridge that supports the aircraft at up to 2.5 Gs plus and 1 G minus. The wing has to routinely remain flexible (to a point) and hold 2.5 times the weight of the aircraft off and on. When the wing hits a building, the effect of the aluminum skin is negligible (depending on the strike angle). It's the structural members of titanium underneath that have punching power.

One more thing. High velocity can do amazing things with otherwise weak materials. Hurricane winds from Andrew never got to more than 160 mph. The aluminum structure of the aircraft was moving at 450 mph PLUS when it hit the WTC.


This is a weak piece of plywood striking a much stronger and denser tree trunk at a maximum of 150 mph


Two by four penetrates a much denser palm tree trunk during a hurricane

there was all the motive in the world for them to go scalar on 9/11, and it's all speculative. :) again, the beauty of judy wood is that she doesn't speculate. but I can think of several good reasons.

1. it's inevitable that weapons get used. what's the saying about that one again? I don't recall but it represents a more potent version of how money burns holes in pockets. godlike power. godless temptation. military urges. the boredom-laced Because They Can.

2.  to destroy evidence.

3.  arms race. show off what they have to the nonaligned while leveraging their geopolitical ambitions. (two birds with one stone.) if russia already had it then to show what dedicated motherfuckers they are leading up to ww3. sorta like a badass IRA guy smearing his shit all over his cell walls.

4.  occam's razor slash path of least resistance:  http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/JonesScientificMethod.html

5. energy efficient.

6. guy debord's Society Of The Spectacle. aesthetics. this would be my reason if I was one of them. i'd just be dying to see what it actually looks like, to disintegrate the fucking world trade centers.

7. plausible deniability.

dunno. what do you think? are those lame? they're just people. a bunch of assholes.

regarding the titanium frame of the plane, I do find that to be a decent argument since titanium is harder than steel (right?). but that aluminum skin would shear right off and remain visible. it doesn't convince me, though that the noise and fuselage would go through the gargantuan core columns, which they would have to do I'm order for the tail section to not be sticking out of the building. this is also notwithstanding of my own analysis (surely it's not original) that the outer, structural columns were buttressed by the core columns via the concrete slabs wedged between them. (do tell me if this is bollocks.)

as for the speed of the plane assisting its titanium parts in slicing through the above, this doesn't appear to me to comply with newton's 'every action is met with an equal and opposite reaction' equal law of motion. it is my understanding that if the planes and the towers were all suspended from strings in the sky and the buildings were swung into the stationary planes at the same speed, the physics would essentially be replicated.

who here would expect the dangling planes to completely disappear into the buildings?


as for the particle board going through the palm tree, judy wood covers this  type of phenomenon that results from the field effects of tornadoes and hurricanes. nothing to do with speed.

i'll address your other points tomorrow, been doing this on my glitchy phone and it's slow going and a real pita. sorry. judy addresses them all on her website.

one last thing. each tower registered significantly lower on the richter scale when dustifying than the kingdome in seattle when it was pulled after it had been completely stripped.

Offline reanteben

  • Global Moderator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
    • View Profile
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #67 on: September 13, 2012, 05:57:34 PM »
Reanteben,
Thanks for the reply.
Civilization is a large subject area that many of us here have discussed in depth and agree has a lot of endemic destructive inertia for Homo sapiens and the biosphere. However, the battle of the empires for turf is what the wtc towers were all about. If we have free energy, dumping the towers was illogical. Predators may be murderers and thieves but they always act out of logical motives.

I watched the video. I have watched many videos of the towers fall. I have carefully observed the top 20 or so floors on one tower begin to fall  while the rest is NOT falling. I also observe that, just as in WTC 7, the center structure (in this case the antenna tower) falls into the buiding BEFORE the floors begin to collapse. This is TEXTBOOK demolition. A total vibratory attack would produce symmetrical disintegration (you CAN observe the effects of theoretical scalar weapon by placing an aircraft model in a wind tunnel and exceeding VNE -never exceed speed - the aircraft disintegrates from extreme vibrations). Do you agree that the pentagon attacks were linked? I do. The US government does too. Why didn't they "dustify" the Pentagon and WTC 7 too? While we are at it, why bother when you can create earthquakes in Baghdad (complete with dustified Saddam castles) or any place else and then race in like a "humanitarian rescue" operation and take over. That's the smoothest imperial takedown anyone would want! IF we had scalar weapons, we would DEFINITELY employ this quick and dirty strategy. Plausible deniability is important in power politics. If we could deny that we were attacking a country because we were "rescuing" it, we would do so. Hell, we tried with the "bringing Democracy" horseshit! In-your-face evil is bad politics (see blaming the Ai-rabs at one end and the scalar weapon Illuminati at the other - gotta cover all the bases, ya know!).
Darth Vader personalities don't sell worth a shit.

You can't flip the Architects and Engineers who are assuming NOTHING and blaming NOBODY for the destruction of the WTC buildings beyond "the planes couldn't do it" physics into some sort of groupthink phenomenon. Everything they have done is REJECT gooberment groupthink on the wacky "19 punks did it" bullshit story GROUPTHINKED onto we-the-people by the media propagandists. If there is an attempt to discredit the totally science based approach of the architects and engineers for 9/11, it is a gooberment funded disinformation campain, period.

I repeat, you cannot simulate the Doppler phenomenon. Claiming a hologram doppler generator effect is not science. RE, how about some help here? This is science.


How Dr. Judy Wood was treated by anyone out there is not at issue here. If she can present PHYSICAL evidence of scalar weaponry effects beyond the interpretation of the dust produced during the tower destruction, it will be looked at. Remember that she has a hypothesis. Very well, if you have a hypothesis, it means you set out to conclusively prove or disprove your hypothesis by a series of tests. An extreme pulverization of steel, concrete and other building structures would leave chemical traces WITHOUT nanothermite or any other explosive traces. The tiny particle size is not sufficient to prove the theory. She needs mass spectrometer analysis of the dust. Scientists don't give a fuck about egos. They only care about evidence proving or disproving a hypothesis. 

Don't confuse the architects and engineers, all serious professionals, with Prisonplanet host Alex Jones or any other talk show host out there; they are literally not on the same planet. Alex may be right in a lot of his Illuminati conspiracy views but that doesn't have beans to do with the scientific investigation of the WTC destruction. Putting them together does, however, lower the street cred of the Architects and Engineers for 9/11. Who do you think benefits from that besides the gooberment out to deep six the truth?

Why would you send a, from your point of view as stated recently, inaccurate view of the events  on 9/11 to someone you barely communicate with? My old man was an Army officer. After I left West Point, we didn't get along AT ALL. When one of my brothers (the one from the beach) tried to scam me into refinancing a property under inheritance (my mom's legacy), the old man calls me to get me to sign because of all the "help" he had given me and because he was my FATHER. I told him the only thing he had ever given ME was hepatitis that he carried from Korea. That was a bit of hyperbole because he always did put food on the table and provide a roof but I knew he was in on the refi scam that would have left me with the debt and my brother with the money. One time that same brother pulled a practical joke on him in a board game, the old man, not knowing who did it (neither my brother or myself were participating in the game), got up, went to his bedroom and returned and pulled a gun on me. He never apologized to me when my other brother quickly stepped in to claim he had done the prank. What I'm trying to tell you as that when someone loves war, killing and doesn't give shit about anything but power, their behavior ALWAYS defends power, not truth or logic. He didn't give a shit who died in 9/11. He thought Vietnam was a turkey shoot! If you think anyone working in the CIA is different from my old man, you are sadly mistaken.

Dr. judy Wood's view of the physics involving aircraft impacting a structure is unscientific. If she can't do the structural engineering math to compute  shear, compression and torsion stresses from high speed objects made of various materials impacting concrete and steel, she is NOT a scientist.

You would do better to dwell specifically on the stock price of Lockheed Martin, the growth of Mossad influence on our mushrooming security apparatus and the trillions of dollars thrown at OFFENSE weapons contractors than trying to generalize cui bono on our entire, admittedly, destructive human civilization. That too, is a distraction and a strawman. Only the guilty benefit from deflecting people from the truth.

thanks, agelbert. I think.  ;D

tell me why the propulsion system of a missile with a 3D projection system (think tupac's holographic performance from this year) wouldn't create a doppler effect.

when you use the words vibratory and pulverize, you are making two (mutually exclusive I might add) assumptions about the nature of the dustification process. judy makes no such assumptions. myself, I would imagine that neither has merit. disintegrate is a neutral term.

as for dad, he claims he joined the Company as a wobbly, with the idea of changing it from the inside.

ROTFLMAO.

good cop, like chloe.


Offline reanteben

  • Global Moderator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
    • View Profile
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #68 on: September 13, 2012, 06:05:53 PM »
okay sorry, I your two assumptions aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #69 on: September 13, 2012, 10:03:21 PM »
This video is a little dated but still quite applicable. :ernaehrung004:

 
Free Bees - 9-11's a Lie (Stayin' Alive).wmv - YouTube.wmv
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline Surly1

  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18654
    • View Profile
    • Doomstead Diner
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread/ the fun never ends
« Reply #70 on: September 14, 2012, 12:28:17 PM »
9/11 – At Least This Aspect of It – Was NOT An Inside Job
Washington's Blog



People who state that 9/11 was an inside job are claiming that it is a false flag operation which killed people, was used to justify wars in Iraq and elsewhere and a power grab in the U.S.

But  World Trade Center building 7 – the third building to collapse on September 11th – has nothing to do with any inside job:

    * No one died as a result of the collapse

    * No airplane hit the building, and so it was not directly involved in the terrorist attack

    * No wars were launched to avenge WTC7

    * No power grabs or loss of civil liberties ensued because of the collapse of this building

    * Unlike the rest of 9/11, the government has been very quiet about its destruction

As such, the collapse of the building – also known as the “Solomon Brothers Building”  – was not an inside job.

Of course, the building might have been demolished to save lives.  For example, Paul K. Trousdale – a structural engineer with decades of experience – says:

    I had always thought the 3rd building was destroyed to prevent unpredictable collapse.

So why am I wasting your valuable time in discussing this?

Because the government – as part of its political cover-up of negligence before and on 9/11 – pretended that the building collapsed due to “natural causes”.  This should not be entirely surprising … we know that government personnel sometimes misspeak about things like the economy or Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, and they may also have made some minor errors peripherally related to 9/11:

    * The EPA misspoke about the dangers to heroic first responders from toxic chemicals at Ground Zero

    * Government officials misspoke about  9/11 being wholly unforeseeable … including pretending that Al Qaeda’s plans to fly planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon were a complete surprise

    * Top government personnel misspoke about Iraq’s role in 9/11

Again, this post has nothing to do with “9/11 inside job”: no one died when building 7 collapsed.

There is more, with many links... Read the rest: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/09/911-at-least-this-aspect-of-it-was-not-an-inside-job.html:
"...reprehensible lying communist..."

Offline reanteben

  • Global Moderator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
    • View Profile
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #71 on: September 14, 2012, 03:02:52 PM »
hey agelbert,

Quote
IF we had such weaponry with massive and unlimited energy at our disposal to power them, THEN we would have no need of foreign oil resources and no need to dustify the towers.

who exactly is "we"? there is no we in that sense. there's us the commoners, and them. if we, the commoners, got to have our own ZPE boxes what would that do to the control system? the control system first and foremost relies on monopolizing the energy. always has always will. they need foreign oil resources to maintain their control system.

Quote
1. Visual information is not forensic evidence needed to confirm dustification. The proven nanothermite composition of some hastily gathered dust after the towers came down is all the physical evidence we have.

that forensic evidence is more supportive of the dustification theory. thermite is aluminum and iron oxide powder. it is exactly what one would expect to find in the dust of a dustified building that was formerly composed of aluminum (facade) and steel. i say more supportive because of the apparent problems posed by bringing down (and pulverizing) a building "so perfectly" with nanothermite:

(from wood's website):

Quote

III. Pulverization

    Where is the proof that thermite has EVER been used to completely pulverize buildings in controlled demolition (not simply cleaning up debris)? The mechanisms of cutting and pulverization are mutually exclusive and thermite cuts and melts, it is not explosive. "Cutting requires action in one direction," says Jeff Strahl, a 9/11 researcher, "while pulverization requires action in all directions."

    Where is the proof, experimental or otherwise, that thermate has EVER been used to completely pulverize buildings in controlled demolition (not simply cleaning up debris)?

    Where is the proof that nano-enhanced thermite has EVER been used to completely pulverize buildings in controlled demolition (not simply cleaning up debris)? Could thermite have been used to turn the upper 80+ floors of the Twin Towers to ultra-fine dust?

    Above all, how do angle-cut columns relate to pulverizing a building? What is the connection? We fail to see it.

that excerpt was from an article titled "the scientific method applied to the thermite hypothesis," which is worthwhile in its entirety:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/JonesScientificMethod.html

you said:

Quote
2. The rubble pile height is a strawman. The achitects and engineers for 911, unlike Dr. Judy Wood, have a wealth of data on the way structural matter piles up in a controlled demolition. In any event, a visual of a pile of dust and other debris is not physical evidence of scalar weaponry.

it's not a strawman because i'm not trying to discredit the A&E explanation of the rubble pile. i've never seen the A&E explanation. i'm simply asking where did the towers go? in the dustification thread i detailed why the generic argument that the bathtub received the vast majority of the debris was an utterly insufficient explanation. i would be grateful, however, if you posted the A&E findings.

here's an article that calculates the length of steel in each tower, if laid end to end (including the oft-forgotten floorpans [steel plate] into which the concrete floors were poured), to be 550 miles, and does a good job of contextualizing that fact within this debris debate:

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=145&Itemid=60

---

what do you think of my newton's 3rd law reframing of the plane-building impact dynamics? because as far as i can tell, the high velocity argument you made merely increases the net force of the plane on the building (newton's 2nd law) - a net force increase subsequently matched (3rd law) by the building. i believe the key to seeing, intuitively, the impossibility of airliners disappearing into the buildings lies in exposing the psychological illusion that it was possible because the plane was moving and the building was not.

what of the field effects argument? check out this fascinating page from her website:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/erin/erin3.html

what of motive?

---

Quote
Dr. judy Wood's view of the physics involving aircraft impacting a structure is unscientific.

please point me to a good one.

Quote
Why would you send a, from your point of view as stated recently, inaccurate view of the events  on 9/11 to someone you barely communicate with?

i sent it for its accuracies. because the communication we do have at the moment happens to consist of me presenting an extensive case for 9/11 truth.

cheers.




Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #72 on: September 14, 2012, 07:37:19 PM »
Demolition of WTC
Demolition of WTC

Quote
As seen in this revealing photo, the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of destruction by explosives:
1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction
4. Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally
6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
7. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
8. 1200-foot-diameter debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
9. Isolated explosive ejections 20–40 stories below demolition front
10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
12. Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples

Reanteben,
Please refer all questions on item 6 to the Architects and Engineers for 911.  They are writing from experience in these matters and have evidence to back up everything they say.

As to the effects of a large jet aircraft striking a building at 480 mph or so, MIT has a free downloadable physics course that will give you all the tools necessary to do the math after you research the different types of metals that make up all the parts. You will also have to compute the compressive strength of the static materials in the WTC towers to determine how much force is required to cause deformation and subsequent destruction of an impacted wall section. Concrete, being brittle, has high compressive strength but low tensile and shear strength so it shatters easily whereas steel has high compressive strength as well as high tensile, shear and torsion strength. Structural steel bends quite a ways before it breaks. That's why they use it for skyscrapers; this is the built in safety margin that prevents a total collapse. ONLY explosives can eliminate that safety margin.
I'm sure the A&E for 911 have done that math but since you don't seem to believe they are credible, you will have to do the math yourself.  I am satisfied that, unlike our gooberment, they aren't pushing fairy tales.
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/evidence.html

I have seen many of the lectures below so I am not sending you on some wild goose chase. This guy is good. He teaches physics in an entertaining and interesting manner. Even if we weren't discussing controlled demolitions, I would recommend him just for his lectures on wave functions and vibratory phenomena. It's ALL free and downloadable thanks to one of the few good things Bill Gates has done (pay MIT to release the courses free).

Quote
Course Highlights

The 35 video lectures by Professor Lewin, were recorded on the MIT campus during the Fall of 1999. Prof. Lewin is well known at MIT and beyond for his dynamic and engaging lecture style.

Course Description

8.01 is a first-semester freshman physics class in Newtonian Mechanics, Fluid Mechanics, and Kinetic Gas Theory. In addition to the basic concepts of Newtonian Mechanics, Fluid Mechanics, and Kinetic Gas Theory, a variety of interesting topics are covered in this course: Binary Stars, Neutron Stars, Black Holes, Resonance Phenomena, Musical Instruments, Stellar Collapse, Supernovae, Astronomical observations from very high flying balloons (lecture 35), and you will be allowed a peek into the intriguing Quantum World.
 
Also by Walter Lewin
 
Courses:
 •Electricity and Magnetism (8.02)- with a complete set of 36 video lectures from the Spring of 2002
•Vibrations and Waves (8.03) - with a complete set of 23 video lectures from the Fall of 2004

http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-01-physics-i-classical-mechanics-fall-1999/

Occam's razor, a point you brought up, requires that you pursue conventional possibilities prior to exotic energy weapon utilization theory. As RE would say, it's  just CFS.

You asked "who is WE"? "WE" is the oil oligarchy that runs the gooberment. I thought you knew that. The claim that the 1% , as you put it, "requires foreign oil resources to control us" is nonsensical if they have scalar weapons. If you can't see that, then I certainly won't be able to convince you of the total irrationality of such a mindset. I never said a word about the 1% SHARING ZPE with the 99%. YOU implied that I said that. I said they would use the WEAPONS on us, not share the technology. Get this. If they have that kind of technology, THEY DON'T NEED US (the 99%).

You also did not answer why they were so selective about the targets. But don't worry about it. I understand.You are just defending your position and don't want to deal with issues that weaken your argument. That's good game theory but it has nothing to do with scientific truth.

If you do not think an oil oligarchy runs this country, please be kind enough to tell me who does (with some names, history and proof). Until you stop generalizing who did what, I really cannot discuss 911 Means, Motive and Opportunity with you.

Even though I disagree with your views, I respect your views but see you are not open to having them challenged so there is no point boring readers here with questions that have little bearing on the most important issue in regard to 911. The realy important question is, when do we prosecute the motherfuckers who did it!!?  When we get to that, I hope the good people (yeah, there are still some there) in government go after the people that helped cover it up. They are an accessory to genocide. A life prison sentence growing Duckweed for ethanol would be most appropriate after those pigs supporting the oil oligarchy were stripped of their assets.

Sorry I couldn't help you. I hope that reviewing some physics does.


« Last Edit: September 14, 2012, 07:57:34 PM by agelbert »
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #73 on: September 14, 2012, 08:29:21 PM »
Surly1,
Quote
Again, this post has nothing to do with “9/11 inside job”: no one died when building 7 collapsed.

YEP.

Your grasp of the English language far exceeds mine. WTC 7 was definetly and "outside" job.  :icon_mrgreen:

But you know, there's some strange and mendacious single press women that moved into our gooberment's press release landscape after 911. They weren't there for Slick Willie. He "did not inhale" and he "never had sex with that woman" either. Notice the style. Notice the overt mendacity. The people didn't like that. It didn't look good. So they went out and hired two single women to front for any politician caught lying his or her ass off.
These ladies are at the forefront of ALL government press releases, speeches, interviews and anythin' that ain't in writin'!  I tell ya they're takin' this country DOWN!





 Meet Miss PEAK and Miss POKE.   ;D
« Last Edit: September 14, 2012, 08:31:29 PM by agelbert »
Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline reanteben

  • Global Moderator
  • Waitstaff
  • *****
  • Posts: 619
    • View Profile
Re: Your 9-11 conspiracy thread
« Reply #74 on: September 14, 2012, 10:09:51 PM »
see agelbert. see agelbert run.

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://vimeo.com/49080352&sa=X&ei=hAxUUJyNN-rhiALXlIHIBw&ved=0CCEQuAIwAA&usg=AFQjCNFJSxI_6khv6RBa0Cuu3Z49vbNX0g






 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
648 Views
Last post October 31, 2015, 02:33:44 AM
by Guest
0 Replies
687 Views
Last post February 17, 2016, 06:10:17 AM
by Eddie
Conspiracy

Started by g Conspiracy

1 Replies
496 Views
Last post December 15, 2016, 02:47:44 PM
by Eddie