The engineering evidence shown in this is pretty convincing. I’ve heard it all before, but never really watched some of the footage and thought about it.

http://topinfopost.com/2013/07/03/911-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out

Hahahahahahahhhahahhahaha

Don’t mind me

[video]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WyUk5RrKfUs&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DWyUk5RrKfUs[/video]

And I was just about to put the tele on too…

the professional perspectives of eight psychologists who explain some of the reasons why it is so hard for people to face the scientific evidence. This is the most scientific and compelling 9/11 documentary film to date

I would watch it but in all honesty I cannot handle the truth the whole truth and nothing but the scientific truth

I think you’ll find that’s ‘science fact truth’

Can I just clarify.. I’m not saying that these theories are correct…

I’ve laughed my head off at lots of them over the years.

Watched them and seen through all the flaws and paranoya, but the evidence surrounding tower 7 (the third building that dropped even though no plane hit it) just made me go…. oooh eerrr, what if?

You remind me of someone?

If i could just find my bearings id be able to claim my £5

Website with breaking news Topinfopost.

Sorry..who?

Easy guys, as much as i completely cannot abide the rabid enthusiasm of conspiracy nuts at least give chilled76 a coherent answer as to why he is wrong.

This is just playground bullying at its lowest.

(You’re wrong, You’re sad, haha. ) Come on, try a bit harder.

This is just playground bullying at its lowest.

Rubbish, I’ve barely got started.

The video is an hour long, can’t you just tell us who done it ?

Wait, let me guess ………. “nobody knows” ? 🙂

as much as i completely cannot abide the rabid enthusiasm of conspiracy nuts at least give chilled76 a coherent answer as to why he is wrong.

Does it really need to be explicitly stated that they are wrong because two planes hit the twin towers and burst into flames and this caused everything that happened in that area that day.

Really does it?

You lot are hilarious, I’d like to point out that playground bullying requires the recipient to be affected by it…. of which this isn’t the case. I should know, I had to deal with a serious incident of racist bullying at 10:30am this morning.

Some of the users on here could do with learning to have a mature discussion though (which ultimately is what a forum is for).

Piemonster… your behaviour reminds me of a lot of 15 year old’s I teach. Well done you…. I’d love to tell you that you should be proud of how brilliantly you have scorned me, and that I feel suitably humiliated and publicly belittled by you… however… you actually only really achieved to make me think “what the hell has happened to STW?, has half of pinkbike migrated here?”

I’ve already stated I don’t necessarily believe this, and that I’ve always laughed at this stuff, but this ONE video made me think oooh what if…

Not “oh my god, it was all a government stitch up”.

If you watch it, this video doesn’t even try and point a finger of blame, it just shows engineering evidence of why it seems unlikely that the steel structures should have failed like they did…. I’ve considered what has been put in front of me and for the first time ever not completely dismissed what is being suggested.

It’s just interesting, nothing more will come of it… other than speculation and discussion. Something I thought might happen here, however it appears the maturity of some of the users on this forum has turned back a few decades.

I posted it on here, as I’m aware there are a large number of degree qualified engineers (of which I’m one.. I left engineering to be a Maths teacher), and would love some opinions from other people who understand steel and malleable temperatures better than I do.

Paul

Piemonster… you’re behaviour reminds me of a lot of 15 year old’s I teach.

Correct

But it’s meant with affection.

Come’s across more like an internet troll.

this video doesn’t even try and point a finger of blame

How disappointing. I’ll carry on blaming Al-Qaeda then.

Come’s across more like an internet troll.

It’s more a 50/50 split

Wish you had been my maths teacher, I might have been able to convince you that the dog did really eat my homework, because I must have done it otherwise I wouldn’t have called it homework, and it would have just been a story of a dog eating a blank piece of paper.

Just to give a more objective viewpoint,

3/10 for the Troll

7.5/10 for the banter
😮

Thanks guys, clear this sort of discussion isn’t welcome here. I’ll see if I can find a civil engineering forum to discuss some of the technical aspects/flaws in this video.

Eight seconds on google provides a number of responses. Here’s one.

http://www.icke-exposed.co.uk/911-truth/911-explosive-evidence-debunked-by-the-snowball-effect/

(amusingly, when I typed “explosive evidence” one of the suggested search terms was “explosive evidence debunked”…)

I’ll see if I can find a civil engineering forum to discuss some of the technical aspects/flaws in this video.

Oh, please post the link here when you do. That sounds like it’ll be compulsive reading.

3/10 for the Troll

*flounces at the disappointing score

chilled76 – Member

Can I just clarify.. I’m not saying that these theories are correct…

I’ve laughed my head off at lots of them over the years.

chilled76 – Member

Thanks guys, clear this sort of discussion isn’t welcome here.

So basically what you are saying is that you used to laugh at 9/11 conspiracy theories but now you’ve changed your mind and strongly resent other people who haven’t also changed their minds and are still laughing, is that right ?

My god, why are you bringing this up again? Can’t you just accept it was the extremist Muslims who hate American freedom, after all Uncle Sam told us, so it must be true, HOORAH!

DISCLAIMER

Before the Stw Liberalist argumentalists get all agitated, I’m not saying the video is the truth, just that I don’t take everything that’s rammed down my throat as gospel.

Peace out

I don’t take everything that’s rammed down my throat as gospel.

What’s been ‘rammed down your throat’ ?

Do you mean the news ?

Improbable as the attack was, an inside job just seems utterly impossible to me.

I’m going to put my head above the parapet here and await having it blown off but I actually watched it and found it very interesting and thought provoking . On the other hand the playground bullying mentality displayed here is pretty pathetic , did any of you actually spend an hour of your oh so precious time watching the video before condemning it ?

Figure of speech.

No, I haven’t got that much time to waste on puerile drivel, I’m much too busy on the forum

I saw a program recently that said that although the WTC was designed to withstand a hit from large aircraft, it could not stand up following the resultant fire. Stated that fire supression systems were poor, as was the fire resistant foam that should have covered much of the steel.Open space allowed fie to spread more quickly, so down todesign flaws and workmanship.

Not an expert in their use in demolition, however I have practical knowledge of rigging explosives charges.
If explosives were used they would have to be brought past security by teams of people, presumably past security in not one but 2 buildings. Experts would have to be used to calculate quanities required and positioning to best bring the buildings down. I doubt there are a huge amount of people capable of doing this whilst making it look just like a plane strike. They would have to be detonated at a specificc time with nochance of accidental initiation from the plane strikes.

Presumably those charging the buildings would have known which floors the planes were to hit so that charges were not placed above that point. This is time consuning, seems hard to believe this could happen with nobody noticing.

As the quantity of explosives needed is so large then I would imagine some debris would show signs of explosion, or remnants could be found, so the recovery team must have been in on it.

Specialist explosives likely to be needed, det cord, shaped charges. Not likely to be done with lorry loads of fertilizer wheel barrowed upthe stair. If sourced in the US it is unlikely that enough explosives to destroy the WTC could disappear from a depot without somebody noticing.

To summarize I an unconvinced by thw theory.

The official explanation in less than 5 minutes

Pretty sure Cougar didn’t watch it. There are counter arguments to everything, which is what makes this discussion so difficult. Some of the arguments are much poorer than others, though. See cougar’s link for an example. btw, there’s a book entitled “Debunking 9/11 Debunking” by your logic, does that mean it wins?

It seems to me that the sobriety of the arguments, and the willingness to consider all the facts is skewed more on one side than the other. There’s certainly one side that wins on petty name calling and nasty vindictiveness, eas evidenced here.

Edit after athgray: yup there’s plenty that’s not explained, same goes both sides. What we’ve got isn’t a satisfactory, though.

I don’t have an hour to watch this.
Why exactly do these conspiracy theorists think anyone other than terrorists would have wanted to do this? What would they gain?

It looks like a horse. It runs like a horse. It has a mane like a horse.

I know, it must be a Zebra!

Conspiracy theories really irritate me. Why are people so willing to believe the most complicated, involved and unlikely theories which are entirely dependent upon vast numbers of conspirators all working in complete secrecy, when governments and “secret” organisations have proven themselves time and again as inept at keeping secrets?

Molgrips, really ? They managed to make a war from non existant WMDs??

Just popped back to see there has now been a few more civil responses..

It’s the bit about the third building that dropped that I’ve never seen before. No aviation fuel in that building no plane flew into it and it went down like a sack of spuds in the same manner…

How does that happen? Genuine question.. I’m really intrigued as to a civil engineering explanation as to why that happened.

It’s a steel framed building, admittedly there was fires in that third building, but office fires making a steel frame building flatten… well it’s just never happened in history has it? How does that work? When you watch the footage of the third building it looks like a controlled demolition.

It most probably isn’t… but I would love to know what caused it to do that?

WT7 for anyone that’s not already read one of these threads.

The wiki overview http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

No aviation fuel in that building no plane flew into it and it went down like a sack of spuds in the same manner…

When you watch the footage of the third building it looks like a controlled demolition.

It sounds as if the conspirators forgot to fly a plane into it, very amateurish.