A nice essay

[Docker]

I like this little piece, it's by batsrus in LC. It sums up the way truthers feel about the nuts very nicely:

"The tower fell in a time almost identical to that of a free-falling object, dropped from that height, meaning that it's physically impossible for it to have collapsed by the method of the top floors smashing through the lower floors. But according to the conspiracy theorists, the laws of gravity were temporarily suspended on the morning of Sept 11. It appears that the evil psychic power of those dreadful Arabs knew no bounds. Even after they were dead, they were able, by the power of their evil spirits, to force down the tower at a speed physically impossible under the laws of gravity, had it been meeting any resistance from fireproofed steel structures originally designed to resist many tons of hurricane force wind as well as the impact of a Boeing passenger jet straying off course.

Clearly, these conspiracy nuts never did their science homework at school, but did become extremely adept at inventing tall tales for why.
"Muslim terrorists stole my notes, sir"
"No miss, the kerosine heater blew up and vapourized everything in the street, except for my passport."
"You see sir, the schoolbus was hijacked by Arabs who destroyed my homework because they hate our freedoms."
Or perhaps they misunderstood the term "creative science" and mistakenly thought that coming up with such rubbish was, in fact, their science homework.

The ferocious heat generated by this ghastly kerosine was, according to the conspiracy theorists, the reason why so many of the WTC victims can't be identified. DNA is destroyed by heat. (Although 2000°C isn't really required, 100°C will generally do the job.) This is quite remarkable, because according to the conspiracy theorist, the nature of DNA suddenly changes if you go to a different city. That's right! If you are killed by an Arab terrorist in New York, your DNA will be destroyed by such temperatures. But if you are killed by an Arab terrorist in Washington DC, your DNA will be so robust that it can survive temperatures which completely vapourize a 65 ton aircraft.

You see, these loonies have somehow concocted the idea that the missile which hit the pentagon was not a missile at all, but one of the hijacked planes. And to prove this unlikely premise, they point to a propaganda statement from the Bush regime, which rather stupidly claims that all but one of the people aboard the plane were identified from the site by DNA testing, even though nothing remains of the plane. The plane was vapourized by the fuel tank explosion maintain these space loonies, but the people inside it were all but one identified by DNA testing.

So there we have it. The qualities of DNA are different, depending upon which city you're in, or perhaps depending upon which fairy story you're trying to sell at any particular time.

As American's gear up to impeach the traitor Bush, and stop his perpetual oil war, it's not helpful to have these idiots distracting from the process by spreading silly conspiracy theories about mythical Arabs, stories which do nothing but play into the hands of the extremist Bush regime.

At a less serious time, we might tolerate such crackpots with amused detachment, but they need to understand that the treachery that was perpetrated on Sept 11, and the subsequent war crimes committed in "retaliation", are far too serious for us to allow such frivolous self-indulgence to go unchallenged.

Those who are truly addicted to conspiracy delusions should find a more appropriate outlet for their
Paranoia.

It's time to stop loony conspiracy theories about Sept 11."

[Anti-sophist]

I stopped reading when they made a claim that they couldn't back up...


The tower fell in a time almost identical to that of a free-falling object, dropped from that height, meaning that it's physically impossible for it to have collapsed by the method of the top floors smashing through the lower floors.


Hahah. Obviously

[Garb]

Last time I checked, the laws of gravity weren't suspended and a guy named Osama DID attack us on our own soil.

[Matthew Best]

I can agree with the last sentence, at least.

[Arus808]

wow, not surprising, three abandoned threads by docker, and he starts a new one.

gee, i bet by page 20, he'll abandon this one and start another one.

[Docker]

Last time I checked, the laws of gravity weren't suspended and a guy named Osama DID attack us on our own soil.

Care to show me some hard proof against Osama?

Bear in mind the FBI has no hard evidence.

[Darth Rotor]

Last time I checked, the laws of gravity weren't suspended and a guy named Osama DID attack us on our own soil.
No he didn't. He conned some other rubes to do it for him. Last I hear, it was 19 of them.

DR

[Docker]

Last time I checked, the laws of gravity weren't suspended and a guy named Osama DID attack us on our own soil.

What are the laws of gravity?

[Garb]

Care to show me some hard proof against Osama?

Bear in mind the FBI has no hard evidence.

1. The paper didn't show any hard evidence, why should I?

2. Normally you gotta capture the guy for the trials to take place and actually convict him of it.

Oh and didn't he confess on tape?

[sleahead]

No, it's not by batsrus. It's a cut and paste job by batsrus. The original is by Gerald Holmgren, a real nut and no-planer. I think some Cts are even a little afraid of the guy.

[Docker]

1. The paper didn't show any hard evidence, why should I?

2. Normally you gotta capture the guy for the trials to take place and actually convict him of it.

Oh right you can confidently say Osama did attack you yet you admit he hasn't had a trial? Do you often accuse innocent people of murder.

I don't have to provide evidence, if you say Osama did it the burden of proof is on you.

[Arus808]

Oh right you can confidently say Osama did attack you yet you admit he hasn't had a trial? Do you often accuse innocent people of murder.

I don't have to provide evidence, if you say Osama did it the burden of proof is on you.

he confessed. you dont need a trial to be considered guilty of a crime.
that's why so many pedophiles, rapists and murderers can go scott free.

[Docker]

No, it's not by batsrus. It's a cut and paste job by batsrus. The original is by Gerald Holmgren, a real nut and no-planer. I think some Cts are even a little afraid of the guy.

Sorry, I didn't know that. batsrus passed it off as his own.

[Garb]

Oh right you can confidently say Osama did attack you yet you admit he hasn't had a trial? Do you often accuse innocent people of murder.

I don't have to provide evidence, if you say Osama did it the burden of proof is on you.

I can say he did when the guy confesses it.

And no he isn't innocent.

Evidence? The tape of course.

[Shrinker]

I like this little piece, it's by batsrus in LC. It sums up the way truthers feel about the nuts very nicely:


Yawn.

It's funny the way these idiots keep writing these little twisted versions of reality. It's as if they'd read a debunk somewhere and got frightened that they were actually starting to believe it. Gotta keep reassuring yourselves - the official version is ridiculous, the official version is ridiculous... etc.

[Bell]

Thread number 6 created by Ducker, expected to be abandoned by him within 12 hours.

[Docker]

he confessed. you dont need a trial to be considered guilty of a crime.
that's why so many pedophiles, rapists and murderers can go scott free.

This is probably the worst i've heard.

Have you not heard of innocent til proven guilty?

[Docker]

I can say he did when the guy confesses it.

And no he isn't innocent.

Evidence? The tape of course.

You have had this tape looked at by experts I assume? Or did you just soak in what the goverment told you about it, like a sponge.

[Garb]

This is probably the worst i've heard.

Have you not heard of innocent til proven guilty?

When the guy freaking confesses, that is pretty much out the window, don't ya think?

[Darth Rotor]

Oh right you can confidently say Osama did attack you yet you admit he hasn't had a trial? Do you often accuse innocent people of murder.

I don't have to provide evidence, if you say Osama did it the burden of proof is on you.
The charge for 9-11, would be conspiracy, though one wonders if the evidence gained by interrogating KSM would be tossed out of court due to methods.

A more likely charge would be the Tanzania and Kenya bombings, and the USS Cole bombing.

As far as I am concerned, the executive order should be, to the team that captures him (if he is ever captured) "make sure he gets hit by enough lead during the capturing event that he is dead by the time you get the cuffs on him."


ETA: for Garb. To play devil's advocate, Mr Karr admitted to killing Jon Benet Ramsey. Confessions are a curious dog in a courtroom.

DR

[Garb]

You have had this tape looked at by experts I assume? Or did you just soak in what the goverment told you about it, like a sponge.

Proof that the tape is not Osama?

Oh yeah, in a couple shots he looks "different"

[steve s]

The tower fell in a time almost identical to that of a free-falling object,

Video of the collapse clearly shows that beams falling away from the towers fell faster than the rest of the collapsing debris field. So if beams which are in freefall are travelling faster than the collapsing towers, then the towers must have been collapsing SLOWER than freefall.

I stopped reading after that part. If they couldn't even get that right, then the rest is sure to be nonsense.

Steve S.

[Docker]

When the guy freaking confesses, that is pretty much out the window, don't ya think?

So you think all confessions are real? Right well James Files shot kennedy then.

[Arus808]

This is probably the worst i've heard.

again you show again you failed reading comprehension 101
SEE that word "considered" in there.

Please look up that definition

Have you not heard of innocent til proven guilty?
he conressed. that means he's guilty.

[Docker]

Proof that the tape is not Osama?

Oh yeah, in a couple shots he looks "different"

I don't have to provide proof, you are accusing him.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I like this little piece, it's by batsrus in LC. It sums up the way truthers feel about the nuts very nicely:

"The tower fell in a time almost identical to that of a free-falling object, dropped from that height, meaning that it's physically impossible for it to have collapsed by the method of the top floors smashing through the lower floors.
Strawman argument. It has been repeatedly shown that the collapse of the towers took longer than freefall in a vacuum.

But according to the conspiracy theorists, the laws of gravity were temporarily suspended on the morning of Sept 11. It appears that the evil psychic power of those dreadful Arabs knew no bounds. Even after they were dead, they were able, by the power of their evil spirits, to force down the tower at a speed physically impossible under the laws of gravity,
This is the second part of the strawman, whereby the false claims of the opponents argument are counter-argued.

had it been meeting any resistance from fireproofed steel structures originally designed to resist many tons of hurricane force wind as well as the impact of a Boeing passenger jet straying off course.
This has also been addressed, ad nauseum.

Clearly, these conspiracy nuts never did their science homework at school, but did become extremely adept at inventing tall tales for why.
"Muslim terrorists stole my notes, sir"
"No miss, the kerosine heater blew up and vapourized everything in the street, except for my passport."
"You see sir, the schoolbus was hijacked by Arabs who destroyed my homework because they hate our freedoms."
Or perhaps they misunderstood the term "creative science" and mistakenly thought that coming up with such rubbish was, in fact, their science homework.

Ad hominem and poisoning the well.

The ferocious heat generated by this ghastly kerosine was, according to the conspiracy theorists, the reason why so many of the WTC victims can't be identified. DNA is destroyed by heat.
I have never seen this claim made by anyone, on either side of the issue, outside of this quote.

(Although 2000°C isn't really required, 100°C will generally do the job.) This is quite remarkable, because according to the conspiracy theorist, the nature of DNA suddenly changes if you go to a different city. That's right! If you are killed by an Arab terrorist in New York, your DNA will be destroyed by such temperatures.
I have never seen this claim made by anyone, on either side of the issue, outside of this quote.

But if you are killed by an Arab terrorist in Washington DC, your DNA will be so robust that it can survive temperatures which completely vapourize a 65 ton aircraft.
Further strawman fallacies, as physical remnants of the plane were found.

You see, these loonies have somehow concocted the idea that the missile which hit the pentagon was not a missile at all, but one of the hijacked planes. And to prove this unlikely premise, they point to a propaganda statement from the Bush regime, which rather stupidly claims that all but one of the people aboard the plane were identified from the site by DNA testing, even though nothing remains of the plane. The plane was vapourized by the fuel tank explosion maintain these space loonies, but the people inside it were all but one identified by DNA testing.
Further strawman fallacies. The arguments for flight 77 striking the Pentagon, as described by the reports/analysis, is supported by many different forms of evidence and does not rely solely on DNA testing.

So there we have it. The qualities of DNA are different, depending upon which city you're in, or perhaps depending upon which fairy story you're trying to sell at any particular time.
Summarizing the aforementioned strawmen.

As American's gear up to impeach the traitor Bush, and stop his perpetual oil war, it's not helpful to have these idiots distracting from the process by spreading silly conspiracy theories about mythical Arabs, stories which do nothing but play into the hands of the extremist Bush regime.
Non-sequitor and false choice fallacy. There are people on both sides of the issue that take issue with the war, want President Bush out of office, and feel that the administration has overstepped its bounds.

At a less serious time, we might tolerate such crackpots with amused detachment, but they need to understand that the treachery that was perpetrated on Sept 11, and the subsequent war crimes committed in "retaliation", are far too serious for us to allow such frivolous self-indulgence to go unchallenged.

Those who are truly addicted to conspiracy delusions should find a more appropriate outlet for their
Paranoia.

It's time to stop loony conspiracy theories about Sept 11."

Pot. Kettle. Black.

[Garb]

So you think all confessions are real? Right well James Files shot kennedy then.

Well unless you can prove Osama is insane and is only doing it for attention, then I am going to assume his confession is real.

[Docker]

Video of the collapse clearly shows that beams falling away from the towers fell faster than the rest of the collapsing debris field. So if beams which are in freefall are travelling faster than the collapsing towers, then the towers must have been collapsing SLOWER than freefall.

I stopped reading after that part. If they couldn't even get that right, then the rest is sure to be nonsense.

Steve S.

It also shows squibs 20 storeys below the debris, so are you saying the floors pancaked faster than gravity?

[realitybites]

Docker, I'm wondering if you have any thoughts of your own on 9/11. Anything in particular you, personally, would like to bring to the table, be it issues you have with the events of that day, discrepancies you'd like to see addressed, that sort of thing...

Or are you just here to post pictures and other people's work?

[Garb]

It also shows squibs 20 storeys below the debris, so are you saying the floors pancaked faster than gravity?

No controlled demo has random squibs on random floors during collapse.

I don't have to provide proof, you are accusing him.

The tape is proof. Prove that the tape isn't him.

[Arus808]

docker, when are you going to offer evidence of your claims found in these threads, to which you haven't provided as of yet.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=66906
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=67011
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=66977
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=67021

You know what they say when attending a buffet? do not put more on your plate than you can eat.
Well, you've already filled your plate. Stop creating new threads until you've satisfactorally finished the above threads or admit in them that your claims are not supported by any facts or evidence, apologize to whom you insulted and admit that you were wrong.

[Docker]

Well unless you can prove Osama is insane and is only doing it for attention, then I am going to assume his confession is real.

Show me your proof he confessed. Source it please.

[Bell]

I don't have to provide proof, you are accusing him.

Do you accept Osama bin Laden approved and supported the attacks?

[Arus808]

It also shows squibs 20 storeys below the debris, so are you saying the floors pancaked faster than gravity?


as stated a million times over, those aren't squibs.

[Docker]

No controlled demo has random squibs on random floors during collapse.


Source?

[scissorhands]

Its like the night of the living dead, dorker keeps getting flattened in every thread he starts yet pops up again with yet more deluded posts.
I can almost imagine those thwackitty, thwackitty, thwack noises eminating from his bedroom.
Its not nice, that thought. :(

[Arus808]

Source?

implosionworld.com .. you can speak with the numerous demolition experts there.

[Docker]

Do you accept Osama bin Laden approved and supported the attacks?

If the FBI have no hard evidence then I have to go with what they say.

[Darth Rotor]

docker, when are you going to offer evidence of your claims found in these threads, to which you haven't provided as of yet.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=66906
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=67011
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=66977
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=67021

The fault, dear Arus, is not in our trolls, but in ourselves, that we dignify their fecal utterances with reply.

DR

[gumboot]

I like this little piece, it's by batsrus in LC. It sums up the way truthers feel about the nuts very nicely:

The tower fell in a time almost identical to that of a free-falling object


No need to even finish the first sentence. Docker, did you join the movement a week ago or something? This stuff is so old its boring.

-Gumboot

[realitybites]

If the FBI have no hard evidence then I have to go with what they say.
So you're a firm believer in what the FBI, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, says.

We're making progress guys!

[steve s]

It also shows squibs 20 storeys below the debris, so are you saying the floors pancaked faster than gravity?

Point 1) "Squibs" is not a term used in the CD industry. They're called charges. Squibs are what they use in Hollywood to simulate bullet hits. By using the term squibs you're just exposing your ignorance of the subject.

Point 2) Those "squibs" you refer to are a handfull of windows getting blown out by the increasing air pressure due to the collapse.

Point 3) If those really had been charges, then the building would have started to collapse there. Watch the video. No collapse initiates at that point.

Steve S.

[Garb]

Source?

All you need to do is look at a controlled demolition. And please tell me what the point of having explosions DURING collapse?

And about the video, I know you have seen it or at least heard of it, so I don't know why I have to link a source. It is common knowledge.

[beachnut]

It's time to stop loony conspiracy theories about Sept 11."

I see you will not be joining this movement!

the movement you seem to be is Charlie Sheen's vapor facts movement of 9/11 misleading junk and other fantasies only high school dropouts can follow (or equivalent people challenged mentally to think or function without nut case leaders telling them what to think, or just making up stuff as they go type, asking questions instead of producing rational research to answer the same)

too bad these guys took five years to make up such cute junk

[realitybites]

Docker, go here (http://www.controlled-demolition.com/images/client/jlhudson.mpg).

Turn up your volume. You can watch the video if you want, but I'm more interested in your thoughts on how the largest controlled demolition yet sounds.

[Redtail]

Oh right you can confidently say Osama did attack you yet you admit he hasn't had a trial? Do you often accuse innocent people of murder.


So you don't believe that elements of our Government perpetrated 9/11?

[DarkMagician]

Source?
Look for any other declared CD videos out there on the internet. If you find one with charges going on random floors, come back and show us.

[realitybites]

Look for any other declared CD videos out there on the internet. If you find one with squibs going on random floors, come back and show us.
Docker, you can use the one I linked to a few minutes ago.

[dirtywick]

Docker, tell me something. If it was a CD, what is the special property of CD that's different from a collapse that causes things to move downward at freefall speed in a vacuum? Rockets attatched to the top of the tower?

[Docker]

All you need to do is look at a controlled demolition. And please tell me what the point of having explosions DURING collapse?

And about the video, I know you have seen it or at least heard of it, so I don't know why I have to link a source. It is common knowledge.

You said no controlled demolition, so you would need to look at them all.

[Arus808]

All you need to do is look at a controlled demolition. And please tell me what the point of having explosions DURING collapse?

And about the video, I know you have seen it or at least heard of it, so I don't know why I have to link a source. It is common knowledge.


No, he doesn't want to look at real facts remember that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ph7HzxcLEkI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUIdf4UJ3_4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yK9XLRb1u8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-AjI78H2eo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8vREo7PFz4
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/images/client/villa_panamericanas.mpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRaNwPGcQcM
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/images/client/beirut_hilton.mpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-n0YTtc_QM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXfRJPoPNxc

More can be found on the net.

Here's a failed demolition:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-OtZKzEKVk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1vzg1lAIvM


Notice how in all of these videos, its damn noisy?

[Docker]

Point 1) "Squibs" is not a term used in the CD industry. They're called charges. Squibs are what they use in Hollywood to simulate bullet hits. By using the term squibs you're just exposing your ignorance of the subject.

Point 2) Those "squibs" you refer to are a handfull of windows getting blown out by the increasing air pressure due to the collapse.

Point 3) If those really had been charges, then the building would have started to collapse there. Watch the video. No collapse initiates at that point.

Steve S.

So answer my question. If the "squibs" are 20 storeys lower then the floors must be collapsing internally faster than gravity?

[Garb]

You said no controlled demolition, so you would need to look at them all.

Wouldn't it be easier if you showed us a controlled demolition with random explosions during collapse, because we all know that no matter how many videos of CDs we put, you are always going to say "There are probably others that support me"

So answer my question. If the "squibs" are 20 storeys lower then the floors must be collapsing internally faster than gravity?

That isn't a sign of falling fater than gravity. It is a sign of increasing air pressure.

And how is it possible for something to fall faster than gravity? Were the towers built on top of a vaccum?

[Arus808]

You said no controlled demolition, so you would need to look at them all.


no, you would not need to look at them all.
you can look at a handful and get a consensous on how they are done and what happens as they happen.

again you're being purposefully obtuse.

[Docker]

Docker, tell me something. If it was a CD, what is the special property of CD that's different from a collapse that causes things to move downward at freefall speed in a vacuum? Rockets attatched to the top of the tower?

Cd takes out the supports in sequence so that the mass above does not have to break through floors below.

[Arus808]

So answer my question. If the "squibs" are 20 storeys lower then the floors must be collapsing internally faster than gravity?

docker remove myquote from your sig.
YOU Do not have my permission TO EVER use anything i say as your sig fodder.

[Garb]

Cd takes out the supports in sequence so that the mass above does not have to break through floors below.

How does that make a building fall faster than gravity allows it?

[Arus808]

Cd takes out the supports in sequence so that the mass above does not have to break through floors below.

so that proves that the WTC towers were not CD, thanks for agreeing to that.

[DarkMagician]

So answer my question. If the "squibs" are 20 storeys lower then the floors must be collapsing internally faster than gravity?

The "squibs" and the acceleration are not connected, especially to the extent you're trying to connect them.

[Docker]

How does that make a building fall faster than gravity allows it?

When did I say faster than gravity, straw man? I said close to speed of freefall.

[dirtywick]

Cd takes out the supports in sequence so that the mass above does not have to break through floors below.

Which, even in a perfect CD where nothing touches until it hits the ground, the mass can't fall faster than gravity would allow it, correct?

[Docker]

The "squibs" and the acceleration are not connected, especially to the extent you're trying to connect them.

Source?

[DarkMagician]

When did I say faster than gravity, straw man? I said close to speed of freefall.
So answer my question. If the "squibs" are 20 storeys lower then the floors must be collapsing internally faster than gravity?
Methinks we have someone who's not all a-okay upstairs.

[Arus808]

docker 2nd time

Remove my quote from your sig. YOU again took it out of context are using it to mean something else entirely.

YOU do not have persmission EVER to use anything that I post in your sig.

[Garb]

When did I say faster than gravity, straw man? I said close to speed of freefall.

So answer my question. If the "squibs" are 20 storeys lower then the floors must be collapsing internally faster than gravity?

Straw man eh?

[kookbreaker]

Bear in mind the FBI has no hard evidence.

Source?

Bear in mind, the FBI does not investigate acts of war.

[Docker]

Which, even in a perfect CD where nothing touches until it hits the ground, the mass can't fall faster than gravity would allow it, correct?

When did I say faster than gravity straw man?

[negativ]

If the FBI have no hard evidence then I have to go with what they say.

I'm reasonably sure the FBI would also say the 9/11 attacks happened pretty much as they were described in the 9/11 Commission's report.

So, go with what they say.

[Arus808]

When did I say faster than gravity straw man?

omg, how fast you forget

REMOVE MY QUOTE FROM YOUR SIG!

[DarkMagician]

Source?

How's about you give me a source where they are connected?

[Garb]

When did I say faster than gravity straw man?

Already been covered. Care to dig yourself deeper in the hole?

[Docker]

Straw man eh?

that was a question I asked someone. Note the question mark on the end. I was refuting his assertion that the squibs were air.

[beachnut]

Source?

it will not be you

source

source

lets see, is the question during CD do the charges go off at random?

do the charges go off at random in CD?

anyone need a source on this one?

anybody? ferris?

[dirtywick]

When did I say faster than gravity straw man?

It's above.

[DarkMagician]

When did I say faster than gravity straw man?

You just said it a while back, one-fourther!

[Docker]

I was saying if it is just air then the floors would have been pancaking faster than gravity, I don't believe this. I have asked him for a source if you would bother to look

[Arus808]

docker, remove my quote from your sig. last time or again you will be reported.

[kookbreaker]

If the FBI have no hard evidence then I have to go with what they say.

Where did they say that?

[Garb]

that was a question I asked someone. Note the question mark on the end. I was refuting his assertion that the squibs were air.

They were air. Air pressure increases when volume decreases. Simple chemistry.

[Docker]

I was saying if it is just air then the floors would have been pancaking faster than gravity, I don't believe this. I have asked him for a source if you would bother to look

I believe the squibs weren;t air hence it wasn't faster than gravity.

[beachnut]

that was a question I asked someone. Note the question mark on the end. I was refuting his assertion that the squibs were air.

source??? anyone?


the puffs of smoke accelerated as air rushed out of the WTC! fact, not an explosion of RDX, an explosion of air rushing out gaining speed, not like an explosion slowing down as it expands, but air rushing out and more pressure as it increase and speeds up the air flow, not slowing, accelerating

air

you should be familar with air

[Garb]

I believe the squibs weren;t air hence it wasn't faster than gravity.

You are the only one implying the "faster than gravity" term. Like I said, air pressure increased in the towers because the space for the air to go decreased, and the only way out was through the windows.

[Docker]

They were air. Air pressure increases when volume decreases. Simple chemistry.

So why was the air coming out 20 storeys below the destruction? Why random windows, the force would be enough to blow every window out?

[realitybites]

Not to be a party pooper, but what exactly is the topic of this thread? If it's the copy-and-pasted "essay" Docker brought over from LC, this thread should be closed as it was debunked 4 minutes after it was posted....

[Redtail]

Docker when did the FBI say they had no hard evidence against Bin Ladin?

[beachnut]

Point 1) "Squibs" is not a term used in the CD industry. They're called charges. Squibs are what they use in Hollywood to simulate bullet hits. By using the term squibs you're just exposing your ignorance of the subject.

Point 2) Those "squibs" you refer to are a handfull of windows getting blown out by the increasing air pressure due to the collapse.

Point 3) If those really had been charges, then the building would have started to collapse there. Watch the video. No collapse initiates at that point.

Steve S.

A - 100 percent :) (concise, precise, excellent)

[kookbreaker]

I believe the squibs weren;t air hence it wasn't faster than gravity.

What you believe has little bearing.

Read the Implosion World Article (http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf), pay particular attention to point #3.

[Garb]

So why was the air coming out 20 storeys below the destruction? Why random windows, the force would be enough to blow every window out?

It followed the path of least resistance. Obviously those windows had the least resistance. But I ask you again, please show me a controlled demolition where random explosions destroyed random supports.

[Redtail]

So why was the air coming out 20 storeys below the destruction? Why random windows, the force would be enough to blow every window out?

No, once a few of the windows were out the pressure would be relieved.

[Docker]

Docker when did the FBI say they had no hard evidence against Bin Ladin?

On their website.

[Docker]

No, once a few of the windows were out the pressure would be relieved.

I notice you didn't address the 20 storey question.

[Garb]

On their website.

source?

...

[DarkMagician]

I notice you didn't address the 20 storey question.

Because the 20 stories don't have anything to do with it. You're the one blindly asserting that they do.

[kookbreaker]

So why was the air coming out 20 storeys below the destruction? Why random windows, the force would be enough to blow every window out?

Take a small, air-filled baloon and squeeze it until it pops.

Look at the remains. Why did it fail where it did?

Look at how dams fail. Why did they start leaking in one area?

There are hundreds of factors that cause that particular window(s) to fail and result in the one have the material. If you can't understand this you basicly have no concept of basic physics.

[Docker]

It followed the path of least resistance. Obviously those windows had the least resistance. But I ask you again, please show me a controlled demolition where random explosions destroyed random supports.

When did I claim random supports were blown? You like misrepresenting me dont you straw boy

[Garb]

I notice you didn't address the 20 storey question.

What does it matter? You haven't addressed the "random squibs" question either.

[Docker]

...

Their website.

[Redtail]

On their website.

Where on thier website? Could you post a link to this info?

[kookbreaker]

On their website.

Where, exactly? I can find nothing with Bin Laden that says they have no hard evidence linking him to 911.

[Garb]

When did I claim random supports were blown? You like misrepresenting me dont you straw boy

That is the idea of the "squbs seen during the collapse."

What is the reason for the squibs if it wasn't air? How is this an indicator of a government plot?

[dirtywick]

So why was the air coming out 20 storeys below the destruction? Why random windows, the force would be enough to blow every window out?

Not necessarily what's going on. The air pressure would probably be applied evenly to all windows on a floor or in a room, so windows with damage to them from heat or other debris would break first. As the air escaped out those windows, it gets to a point where the rest of the air trying to escape encounters less resistance in the open space where the windows were and leaves that way, and the remaining pressure isn't strong enough to break any more windows.

[Garb]

Docker, are you going to take a stance on anything? Do you believe there were explosives? Do you think a missle hit the pentagon? Do you think WTC7 was CDed? What?

[Docker]

That is the idea of the "squbs seen during the collapse."

What is the reason for the squibs if it wasn't air? How is this an indicator of a government plot?

When did I mention government plot straw man?

[Bell]

Docker, are you going to take a stance on anything? Do you believe there were explosives? Do you think a missle hit the pentagon? Do you think WTC7 was CDed? What?

Ofcourse he isn't. Standard CT nutter tactic. Repeating what other nutters are saying, and when that gets debunked or questioned, he can hide behind the fact that he never made that statement.

Like, he's just asking questions, man.

[Garb]

When did I mention government plot straw man?

The fact you keep on saying Osama didn't do it and how all of this stuff the government did is a lie. That counts as a government plot.

Oh and way to misquote me again. That is good enough for a report.

[Docker]

Where on thier website? Could you post a link to this info?

I'm not doing your research for you, as you clearly haven't bothered to do any. Your idea of research is saying: "Gravy what should my opinion be today?"

Put FBI and osama into google

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

You said no controlled demolition, so you would need to look at them all.

Asking for proof of a negative is generally considered a logical fallacy. All you have to do is show one controlled demolition, outside of the situation in question, that does use them to prove the argument wrong. Get to it.

[dirtywick]

When did I mention government plot straw man?

Isn't that implied by the essay you thought was "nice" and decided to post here when it claims that Muslims terrorists weren't responsible and Bush is a traitor?

What's the point of it then if not that?

[Docker]

The fact you keep on saying Osama didn't do it and how all of this stuff the government did is a lie. That counts as a government plot.

Oh and way to misquote me again. That is good enough for a report.

I didn't misquote you, you said it. I'll remove it if you take out your miisquote.

Run to the moderators.

When did I say osama didn't do it, straw man?

[Redtail]

I notice you didn't address the 20 storey question.


And I notice that you haven't posted where on the FBI website they said they have no hard evidence against Bin Ladin.

[Garb]

I'm not doing your research for you, as you clearly haven't bothered to do any. Your idea of research is saying: "Gravy what should my opinion be today?"

Put FBI and osama into google

How hard is it to post a link when you made the claim?

You'd make us post a link if we made a claim.

[Bell]

I didn't misquote you, you said it. I'll remove it if you take out your miisquote.

Run to the moderators.

When did I say osama didn't do it, straw man?

So Osama did do it? Yes or no?

[Docker]

So Osama did do it? Yes or no?

He han't had a trial so I don't know.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

When did I mention government plot straw man?

No, it is not a strawman argument.

[Garb]

I didn't misquote you, you said it. I'll remove it if you take out your miisquote.

Run to the moderators.

When did I say osama didn't do it, straw man?

The thread. You put it on here, you thought it was nice, and we all know you agreed with it. And yes, you misquoted me, making it seem like I thought Osama is insane and was looking for attention.


You really are that moronic aren't you?

[Redtail]

I'm not doing your research for you, as you clearly haven't bothered to do any. Your idea of research is saying: "Gravy what should my opinion be today?"

Put FBI and osama into google

So you can't back it up? Funny, THe Person who claimed the same thing on the UM boards couldn't link it to the FBI site either.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I'm not doing your research for you, as you clearly haven't bothered to do any. Your idea of research is saying: "Gravy what should my opinion be today?"

Put FBI and osama into google

Argumentum ad ignoratium.

[dirtywick]

Docker, if you don't agree with anything in this essay then why did you post it?

If you do agree with the essay, with what parts specifically?

You seem to be confusing everyone with what claims you're actually making, so now would be a good time to clear up what, exactly, your point is.

[Docker]

The thread. You put it on here, you thought it was nice, and we all know you agreed with it. And yes, you misquoted me, making it seem like I thought Osama is insane and was looking for attention.


You really are that moronic aren't you?

Your making it seem like I thought they fell faster than gravity when in fact I was saying the opposite as you well know.

If you want to play these games you will lose.

[Docker]

Docker, if you don't agree with anything in this essay then why did you post it?

If you do agree with the essay, with what parts specifically?

You seem to be confusing everyone with what claims you're actually making, so now would be a good time to clear up what, exactly, your point is.

I said the essay was nice.

[bob_kark]

When did I mention government plot straw man?
:dl:

Whose sock puppet are you?

[Bell]

He han't had a trial so I don't know.

Yes you do, you say he's innocent.

<snip>

Have you not heard of innocent til proven guilty?

[Garb]

Your making it seem like I thought they fell faster than gravity when in fact I was saying the opposite as you well know.

If you want to play these games you will lose.

Games? I'm dead serious, and you are acting like a complete fool.

[Redtail]

Originally Posted by Docker http://www.randi.org/forumlive/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=2035702#post2035702)
The people that say I never cite sources are liars. I do if I can and if I can't I make clear it's an opinion.

[beachnut]

I'm not doing your research for you, as you clearly haven't bothered to do any. Your idea of research is saying: "Gravy what should my opinion be today?"

Put FBI and osama into google

oh, we do it for you,

are you too lazy to help fellow posters?

source

[realitybites]

I said the essay was nice.
Docker, I think puppies and beer-pong are nice too, but I'm not starting threads about them.

What was your point? Do you have anything to add to the "essay"? Do you agree with it? Do you not agree with it? If so, why? What parts?

What was your purpose in starting this thread?

[dirtywick]

Docker, I think puppies and beer-pong are nice too, but I'm not starting threads about them.

What was your point? Do you have anything to add to the "essay"? Do you agree with it? Do you not agree with it? If so, why? What parts?

What was your purpose in starting this thread?

So he can call people "straw man" and he can ask "when did I say that?"

[realitybites]

So he can call people "straw man" and he can ask "when did I say that?"
... So basically act like a troll.

[dirtywick]

... So basically act like a troll.

Yeah I think that's pretty much what's going on.

[solidslade]

I said the essay was nice.


If you want to play these games you will lose.


He han't had a trial so I don't know.


I'm not doing your research for you, as you clearly haven't bothered to do any. Your idea of research is saying: "Gravy what should my opinion be today?"


When did I mention government plot straw man?

source?


ok Imma break from sitting in the peanut gallery.

You post "articles", avoid making claims, "demand" answers.

Is this the CT idea of "civilized discourse"? Some passive aggressive teenage f*cksnob "demanding to be answered"?

9-11 isn't some game.
It's human history.

It's not an article on 4chan, somethingawful or ebaumsworld.

Watching you CTs "argue" brings the image middleschool kids about to start a fight.

[VespaGuy]

So, Docker, you think this is a nice essay? Despite the fact that your answer to most of the "What do you think happened on 9/11?" questions is "I don't know"?



So do you agree or disgree with this comment that you quoted:



You see, these loonies have somehow concocted the idea that the missile which hit the pentagon was not a missile at all, but one of the hijacked planes. And to prove this unlikely premise, they point to a propaganda statement from the Bush regime, which rather stupidly claims that all but one of the people aboard the plane were identified from the site by DNA testing, even though nothing remains of the plane. The plane was vapourized by the fuel tank explosion maintain these space loonies, but the people inside it were all but one identified by DNA testing.



because it kinda contradicts what you said when you said:



Was the Pentagon hit by a plane? Yes

[geggy]

If the tapes of osama confessing his involvement were evident enough for you, then why hasn't the FBI use the tapes as evidence to prove Osama's guilt and have him indicted? By now they would list him as most wanted for the 9/11 attack, but it appear that they haven't yet done so.

The confession tape released by pentagon sometime in december 2001 came right after top officials from soveriegn government began to express doubts to the US of osama's involvement and asked for evidence.

Also Taliban has offered to hand in Osama if the US would provide them evidence of his involvement. Colin Powell has promised that he would prove Osama's involvement with hard evidence but he never did so.

So was osama telling the truth when he had denied of his involvement twice in front of camera?

[gumboot]

If the tapes of osama confessing his involvement were evident enough for you, then why hasn't the FBI use the tapes as evidence to prove Osama's guilt and have him indicted?


The FBI do not have a chain of custody for the confession tapes, therefore they are not admissable in a US court of law.



By now they would list him as most wanted for the 9/11 attack, but it appear that they haven't yet done so.

See above.




The confession tape released by pentagon sometime in december 2001 came right after top officials from soveriegn government began to express doubts to the US of osama's involvement and asked for evidence.

Sovereign government? What sovereign government?

-Gumboot

[Gravy]

Proof that the tape is not Osama?

Oh yeah, in a couple shots he looks "different"Not in this confession tape. It's clear as day.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/79C6AF22-98FB-4A1C-B21F-2BC36E87F61F.htm

[VespaGuy]

Just an aside, I'm getting really sick of the "Just Asking Questions" routine. It's pretty obvious that Docker believes that the government was involved. He continually just asks questions (JAQs off) so that he can never be held accountable to back up any specific claim. Case in point, this thread: he copies and pastes a post from another forum and simply states it's "nice". No opinon. No agreement or disagreement. No way to back himself into a corner.

Docker. Grow a backbone and stop "JAQing" off. if you want to discuss 9/11 then do it. Until then you are looking more and more foolish every post you make (which works out to looking more foolish about every 5 minutes or so)

[Gravy]

If the tapes of osama confessing his involvement were evident enough for you, then why hasn't the FBI use the tapes as evidence to prove Osama's guilt and have him indicted? By now they would list him as most wanted for the 9/11 attack, but it appear that they haven't yet done so.If I make a tape confessing to a crime, my lawyer will simply say that I was joking, deluded, etc. However, when a known terrorist makes a tape confessing to an act of terrorism, and says more is on its way, I submit that he should be taken seriously. Do you agree?

[kookbreaker]

I'm not doing your research for you, as you clearly haven't bothered to do any. Your idea of research is saying: "Gravy what should my opinion be today?"

So...you cannot support your claims.


Put FBI and osama into google

That is not supporting your claims.

You lied again.

[stateofgrace]

He han't had a trial so I don't know.

So why should he go to trial if the FBI have no "hard evidence" against him ?

[Docker]

Just an aside, I'm getting really sick of the "Just Asking Questions" routine. It's pretty obvious that Docker believes that the government was involved. He continually just asks questions (JAQs off) so that he can never be held accountable to back up any specific claim. Case in point, this thread: he copies and pastes a post from another forum and simply states it's "nice". No opinon. No agreement or disagreement. No way to back himself into a corner.

Docker. Grow a backbone and stop "JAQing" off. if you want to discuss 9/11 then do it. Until then you are looking more and more foolish every post you make (which works out to looking more foolish about every 5 minutes or so)

But there are questions. The jersey girls submitted 400 to the 911 commission and most werent answered. Can you blame people for asking them? Go to those widows and tell them they are JAQing off. You are pissing on those graves.

[stateofgrace]

If the tapes of osama confessing his involvement were evident enough for you, then why hasn't the FBI use the tapes as evidence to prove Osama's guilt and have him indicted? By now they would list him as most wanted for the 9/11 attack, but it appear that they haven't yet done so.


1998.UBL said
"We--with God's help--call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson"

1997.UBL said

"We declared jihad against the US government, because the US government is unjust, criminal and tyrannical. It has committed acts that are extremely unjust, hideous and criminal whether directly or through its support of the Israeli occupation."
"For this and other acts of aggression and injustice, we have declared jihad against the US, because in our religion it is our duty to make jihad so that God's word is the one exalted to the heights and so that we drive the Americans away from all Muslim countries.As for what you asked whether jihad is directed against US soldiers, the civilians in the land of the Two Holy Places (Saudi Arabia, Mecca and Medina) or against the civilians in America, we have focused our declaration on striking at the soldiers in the country of The Two Holy Places."

1996.UBL said

"What happened in Riyadh and [Dhahran] when 24 Americans were killed in two bombings is clear evidence of the huge anger of Saudi people against America. The Saudis now know their real enemy is America."

1995.UBL said

"The urgent thing was communism, but the next target was America... This is an open war up to the end, until victory."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/edicts.html (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/edicts.html)


From these guys in 1998

Shaykh Usamah Bin-Muhammad Bin-Ladin
Ayman al-Zawahiri, amir of the Jihad Group in Egypt
Abu-Yasir Rifa'i Ahmad Taha, Egyptian Islamic Group
Shaykh Mir Hamzah, secretary of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan
Fazlur Rahman, amir of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh

"All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on Allah

On that basis, and in compliance with Allah's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah."

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm (http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm)

There was three indictments issued against UBL in 1998.

Count one.

The named defendants, plus other members of Al Qaeda, "conspired, confederated and agreed to kill nationals of the United States
Bin Laden and others "provided training camps and guesthouses in various areas, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Kenya for the use of Al Qaeda and its affiliated groups,"
Bin Laden and others provided currency and weapons to members of Al Qaeda and associated terrorist groups in various countries throughout the world.

Count Two.

Defendants bin Laden, Atef, Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, and Odeh, together with other members of Al Qaeda "detonated an explosive device that damaged and destroyed the United States Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, and ... directly .. caused the deaths of at least 213 persons, including Kenyan and American citizens."

Count three.

Defendants bin Laden, Atef, Fazul Abdullah Mohammed, Odeh, al-'Owhali. Mustafa Mohamed Fadhil, Khalfan Khamis Mohamed, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, Fahid Mohammed Ally Msalam and Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan, together with other members of Al Qaeda "detonated an explosive device that damaged and destroyed the United States Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, and ... directly .. caused the deaths of at least 11 persons, including Tanzanian citizens.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sh...ho/alqaeda.html (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/alqaeda.html)

Here are the actual indictments.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/indict1.pdf (http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/indict1.pdf)

For further reading please read here.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/indict1.pdf (http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/indict1.pdf)

This quite a long document, it is 31 pages long and all be it the intelligence failing are quite clearly acknowledged, Al Quada has the finger pointed at it repeatedly.It is well worth a read.

Before you go declaring Bin Laden to be nothing but a fall guy at least read up on exactly what is said about this individual and exactly what the nature of this man is.