Jono
7th August 2006, 04:18 AM
Saw a link in an argument over at Stormfront, where the 9/11 conspiracy theories reaches new heights every day.
http://www15.ocn.ne.jp/~oyakodon/doc4.htm#yj
A few typical replies at Stormfront on the www.debunking911.com site.
On the www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
Sorry but jet fuel can't do that. Most of the jet fuel was burned off in the south tower. Furthermore, the towers were grounded in the earth seven stories underground. There was molten steel IN THE BASEMENT AND UNDERGROUND. The planes hit at about the eightieth and ninetieth floors. Jet fuel does not melt steel and as impotent as an agent for creating molten metal.
The CT replies on the below segments and photos.
Well, http://www.debunking911.com/overp.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm
From this page:
http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7_Smoke.jpg
That smoke is so obviously photoshopped in. FEMA couldn't explain why WTC 7 fell seeing as how it wasn't hit by an airplane, had minimal damage to the face and had two small fires on two floors. Random fires and slight damage to the face of the building without an airplane impact DO NOT CAUSE A UNIFORM FREE FALL COLLAPSE.
More CT comments on WTC7 and the debunking911 site:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/images/340_wtc7_damage.jpg
Sorry but that damage can't cause a free fall collapse. And they try to say it's not uniform?
Half way through and it's still tilted to the south. Note the west side of the building has come away from the west face around what used to be the 43rd floor. Light can be seen through the east face windows.
Note the angle to the south has increased and so has the space between the west face and the rest of the building. The west face later lays on the Verizon building to the west. While it looks like it's about to hit the ground, it's still almost as high as the white building to the right. That makes it about 20 stories.
Well not **** it's not going to deviate a few centimeters or degrees off center. Do you know how much material there is there? If the building is halfway collapsed and there is already **** under it, THERE IS STILL MATERIAL THAT HAS SOMEWHERE TO GO. OF COURSE IT WAS TILT TO THE SIDE EVER SO SLIGHTLY. But before the serious pileup upon itself happens, you can clearly see, that it is uniform.
The CT comments on http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
Yes, I have seen that this site addresses the free fall argument, but they do a ****ty job of it.
To which the poster included something from George Humphrey's Greatest Illusion thing.
Point 31.
Facts are very stubborn things. According to the law of falling bodies as originally put forward by Galileo and still accepted today, the total distance traveled at the end of any specific time in a total vacuum is calculated by this formula:
Distance (d) = (32.16/2) X Time in Seconds Squared.
If there is any resistance, then the speed and time of the falling body slows down in relation to the resistance. In the case of the WTC towers North and South, we know that the towers were 1350 feet tall, thus you would have this equation for the fastest time of total drop in a vacuum:
1350 = (32.16/2) X Time in Seconds Squared.
This works out to 9.1627 seconds as the fastest time these buildings could come down. This presents some very interesting questions because the WTC south tower came down in 10.4 seconds and the WTC north tower came down in 8.1 seconds. Additionally, there was resistance, and plenty of it - the resistance was the massive lower sections of the buildings that were stabilized by over 250 major interior columns and exterior steel columns, and thousands of steel trusses. This defies the laws of gravity.
The CT comments on http://www.debunking911.com/overp.htm
Let's look at that first animation at the very top of the page. Do you know why they only want to use that for their arguments? Because they don't want to use the following pictures which kicks their theory in the ass.
http://www.chapelhill.indymedia.org/uploads/051-nt.gif
http://www.chapelhill.indymedia.org/uploads/040-nt.gif
http://www.chapelhill.indymedia.org/uploads/042-nt.gif
http://www.chapelhill.indymedia.org/uploads/161-nt.gif
And his CT diatribe wrap-up:
Oh and here's another thing. This site you referenced for me won't talk about zionism and how the zionists benefit.
It doesn't mention Odigo, the five dancing israelis, the art students who were pulled over in a van which had bomb material that made the police dogs go nuts, or how Michael Chertoff set these jews free after they were detained. Do you know what these jews said on TV while back in Israel to explain how they were ready to film the disaster? "We were there to document the event." You can't do that without prior knowledge. Does that site also talk about how jew murdoch pulled the FOX special that talked about the Israeli spying? Do they talk about Netanyahu's slip of the tongue? Do they deal with these points adequately? The answer is a resounding no.
I bet you they also ignore the fact that the same company who cleaned up the inside job that was Oklahoma City was the same company that cleaned up the world trade center. Controlled Demolition Inc. Not that I should be surprised. Lots of antis love to dodge things.
:boggled:
http://www15.ocn.ne.jp/~oyakodon/doc4.htm#yj
A few typical replies at Stormfront on the www.debunking911.com site.
On the www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
Sorry but jet fuel can't do that. Most of the jet fuel was burned off in the south tower. Furthermore, the towers were grounded in the earth seven stories underground. There was molten steel IN THE BASEMENT AND UNDERGROUND. The planes hit at about the eightieth and ninetieth floors. Jet fuel does not melt steel and as impotent as an agent for creating molten metal.
The CT replies on the below segments and photos.
Well, http://www.debunking911.com/overp.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm
From this page:
http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7_Smoke.jpg
That smoke is so obviously photoshopped in. FEMA couldn't explain why WTC 7 fell seeing as how it wasn't hit by an airplane, had minimal damage to the face and had two small fires on two floors. Random fires and slight damage to the face of the building without an airplane impact DO NOT CAUSE A UNIFORM FREE FALL COLLAPSE.
More CT comments on WTC7 and the debunking911 site:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/images/340_wtc7_damage.jpg
Sorry but that damage can't cause a free fall collapse. And they try to say it's not uniform?
Half way through and it's still tilted to the south. Note the west side of the building has come away from the west face around what used to be the 43rd floor. Light can be seen through the east face windows.
Note the angle to the south has increased and so has the space between the west face and the rest of the building. The west face later lays on the Verizon building to the west. While it looks like it's about to hit the ground, it's still almost as high as the white building to the right. That makes it about 20 stories.
Well not **** it's not going to deviate a few centimeters or degrees off center. Do you know how much material there is there? If the building is halfway collapsed and there is already **** under it, THERE IS STILL MATERIAL THAT HAS SOMEWHERE TO GO. OF COURSE IT WAS TILT TO THE SIDE EVER SO SLIGHTLY. But before the serious pileup upon itself happens, you can clearly see, that it is uniform.
The CT comments on http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
Yes, I have seen that this site addresses the free fall argument, but they do a ****ty job of it.
To which the poster included something from George Humphrey's Greatest Illusion thing.
Point 31.
Facts are very stubborn things. According to the law of falling bodies as originally put forward by Galileo and still accepted today, the total distance traveled at the end of any specific time in a total vacuum is calculated by this formula:
Distance (d) = (32.16/2) X Time in Seconds Squared.
If there is any resistance, then the speed and time of the falling body slows down in relation to the resistance. In the case of the WTC towers North and South, we know that the towers were 1350 feet tall, thus you would have this equation for the fastest time of total drop in a vacuum:
1350 = (32.16/2) X Time in Seconds Squared.
This works out to 9.1627 seconds as the fastest time these buildings could come down. This presents some very interesting questions because the WTC south tower came down in 10.4 seconds and the WTC north tower came down in 8.1 seconds. Additionally, there was resistance, and plenty of it - the resistance was the massive lower sections of the buildings that were stabilized by over 250 major interior columns and exterior steel columns, and thousands of steel trusses. This defies the laws of gravity.
The CT comments on http://www.debunking911.com/overp.htm
Let's look at that first animation at the very top of the page. Do you know why they only want to use that for their arguments? Because they don't want to use the following pictures which kicks their theory in the ass.
http://www.chapelhill.indymedia.org/uploads/051-nt.gif
http://www.chapelhill.indymedia.org/uploads/040-nt.gif
http://www.chapelhill.indymedia.org/uploads/042-nt.gif
http://www.chapelhill.indymedia.org/uploads/161-nt.gif
And his CT diatribe wrap-up:
Oh and here's another thing. This site you referenced for me won't talk about zionism and how the zionists benefit.
It doesn't mention Odigo, the five dancing israelis, the art students who were pulled over in a van which had bomb material that made the police dogs go nuts, or how Michael Chertoff set these jews free after they were detained. Do you know what these jews said on TV while back in Israel to explain how they were ready to film the disaster? "We were there to document the event." You can't do that without prior knowledge. Does that site also talk about how jew murdoch pulled the FOX special that talked about the Israeli spying? Do they talk about Netanyahu's slip of the tongue? Do they deal with these points adequately? The answer is a resounding no.
I bet you they also ignore the fact that the same company who cleaned up the inside job that was Oklahoma City was the same company that cleaned up the world trade center. Controlled Demolition Inc. Not that I should be surprised. Lots of antis love to dodge things.
:boggled: