Comments

Conspiracy or what? — 23 Comments

  1. Thanks for the link Grandad.
    If they had even halfway decent answers to some of the basic questions I’d tick the box they want me to tick: the bad guys dunnit.
    And then someone left a link to a presentation by a Dr Judy Wood. Her delivery skills are pretty rank, but her observations are not. She said that if you dropped a billiard ball from either of the twin towers, it would take 9.4 seconds to hit the ground. And you would still be able to find chunks of the billiard ball and satisfy yourself that yes, this once was a billiard ball. She goes on to say that these 110 storey buildings both disappeared in 8.2 seconds. They simply disappeared. All that was left was dust. There should have been 110 storeys worth of rubble. There wasn’t. There are also unexplainable holes cut into surrounding buildings, as if someone reached down from the sky with an apple-corer and used it to scoop out 24′ diameter chunks of the buildings. That, and 1400 cars that look as if they had been melted. Oddly, the door handles and engine blocks had completely disappeared. From 1400 cars!
    Too many questions, too many unexplained details.
    I will sit on the fence for a while longer.
    CR.
     

  2. Mick – That is a fascinating link.  For a start it isn’t a site set up by some pimply kid in his attic with weird theoris about crop circles , Roswell and the like.  It is set up by a bunch of highly qualified people who, when they speak, you listen.  Interesting that their major concern is along the lines of mine, and it;s gratifying to hear that my theory about building demolition is sound!  Just spent a thoughtful hour or so browsing the site.  Maybe there is something in this conspiracy thing after all?

    Rantyt – As always, my pleasure!  You should follow up on Mick’s link.  It really raisesa lot more questions and precious few answers.  What’s worse is that if the theories are true, then the reality would really be too awful to contemplate.

    TT – Just playing the Devil’s Advocate, but the Americans are pretty hot with their drone aircraft?  It would be a relatively simple exercise to rig an empty airliner and fly it remotely?

  3. Yep found it a month or so ago and did the same – listening to what they have to say etc. Very compulsive yet for every argument you’ll find a counter argument. The thermite in the molten steel is very intriguing amongst other things.
    Bottom line for me, when you get that many qualified people calling for a new investigation then there’s a strong case for just that – a new investigation.

  4. Actually, no. It wouldn’t be.  Well nigh impossible to remotely control a jetliner. Then what did they do with the real ones ?

  5. Mick – If the theories are true, then we will never hear about it.  Too much would be at stake.

    TT – I beg to differ.  Look at the technology that can guide the Mars landers?  The technology that can drive the drones that are used in Afghanistan could be scaled up to fly a passenger jet.  After all, it only has to take off and manouvre.  The most difficult part of flying a plane is the landing which didn’t apply.  I’m not saying that was done, just that it is technically possible.  As for the real planes?  I don’t know.  As I said – I don’t have any answers, just a load of questions.

  6. You should watch the various programmes that have been made about it.  For and against. The “for” is very convincing until you see the debunking one.

  7. Conspiracy theories don’t get me started.
    Mood-landings. KFK . Ireland’s second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty ect. ect.
    I said to a friend of mine several years ago in the movies no matter how unbelievable the plot might seem at the time over the years it becomes reality.
    Look at only a few days ago Google driver-less cars..Minority Report. My favourite of them all is Enemy of the State .
    But getting back to 9/11 does anyone remember at the time they said they found one of the hijackers’ passports in the rubble. Bush did not react because he already knew.

    Today another item worth watching..
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-911-footage-reveals-wtc-7-explosions.html


     
     
     

  8. Do you really think the witless Jackasses (apologies to the equestrian species, that was not called for) politicians we have in office are competent enough to pull of a hoax of this magnitude? 

  9. Is it a conspiracy if it’s all true?

    As I said in response to your ‘Time to move on’ post, This was the Act that brought on the War on Terror, which is being used to take our freedoms and to control us.

    Again I offer these links for anyone interested in knowing what the heck is going on, and how global governance is being instituted. Once you understand what their endgame is, all the other pieces fall into place.

    http://www.infowars.com

    http://ukconspiracy.myfastforum.org

    I can’t thank you enough, Grandad, for this post and for questioning things.

    And thank you to the other repliers who get it, and who question, and for adding those links.

  10. Unfortunately enough, most Americans believe that it is their patriotic duty to believe the story that is fed to them via popular media… so conspiracy theories behind 9/11 are typically hushed as to not upset the right wing crazies that have taken over here…personally, as part of the scientific community, there is reasonable evidence from the way the buildings fell, video of possible charges being let off before the demolition, and insider interviews that claim there were explosions in building 7 before it fell to suggest that the whole ordeal was a cover up for something much larger. Would so many professional and intelligent communities be looking into the truth if there were no proof suggesting that this was a coup? It was the most shaming moment from my country next to the devastation that occurs still in Afghanistan and Iraq. It was a reason to go to a perpetuating war that has cost countless lives in the process. Any American that denies the physical and scientific proof is just perpetuating th atwar machine. We should get a clue.
    see Loose Change 911: An American Coup

  11. Ran across Elvis last year. He was pumping gas at an ESSO station just outside of Knoxville, Tennessee. What was noteworthy was that he had lost weight, perhaps nearly a hundred pounds. Said he finally realized he couldn’t go on eating those fried peanut-butter, bacon and banana sandwiches any more. Claimed he doesn’t miss them.  Or his old life. Said he missed the Colonel, though, despite everything.  My wife was a bit skeptical about the whole notion ’til he sang her a bit of “Love Me Tender”, which she loathes – after that she was convinced. He looks good for someone in his 70s, you’d never guess he lived as hard s he did. Bald, though. That was a shock. Hard worker, too. Checked the fluids under the hood without being asked.

  12. Jim C – When there are billions or even trillions of dollars involved, our politicians are capable of doing anything.

    Quiet Reader – I’m not sure what you are thanking me for?  I question just about everything!!

    Jessster – [welcome, BTW 😉 ] You have out your finger on the one thing that worries me… why are so many highly qualified professionals asking questions.  In the last 24 hours I have looked at quite a number of sites and videos.  Frankly the vast majority are just plain stupid, and some are laughable but there are enough questions being asked by the professionals to really concern me.

    Doc – I’m happy that Elvis is happy.  If he starts singing again, I won’t be so fucking happy though.

  13. Not being a conspiracy theorist either, I’m not bothered by the fact that the towers fell the way they did, and not sideways.
    The reason being that I think it was probably actually very difficult to get them to fall sideways. If one of these buildings had been tilted over at an angle, one side would have become compressed and the other side would have become tensed. They’d have been subjected to bending forces. And they have no little or no bending strength. They weren’t designed to bend.  So if you tilt them over just a bit, you’d get both failures in tension on one side, and in compression in the other. And the towers would have disintegrated  and falled straight downwards.
    Furthermore, neither of the towers showed any sign of tilting over before they fell.  They both failed in compression at the point where fires were raging and the steel frame was being weaken by fire. Once one column failed, the compression forces on all the other weakened columns would have increased, causing the failure of all of them more or less simultaneously.
    Some day I might write a computer simulation model of this. It shouldn’t be too hard.
    Frank
    P.S. And I think Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK from the School Book Depository too!:-)
     
     
     

  14. And another thing.
     
    CR said: “She said that if you dropped a billiard ball from either of the twin towers, it would take 9.4 seconds to hit the ground. And you would still be able to find chunks of the billiard ball and satisfy yourself that yes, this once was a billiard ball. She goes on to say that these 110 storey buildings both disappeared in 8.2 seconds. ”

    The 9.4 seconds is about right. But how did she measure how long it took for the towers to fall? In the first place the point of failure was partly obscured by smoke. And in the second place, the point of impact was totally obscured by dust. It’s impossible to accurately measure how long it took. The best there can be is an estimate of how long it took.

    And finally there is no possibility whatsoever of the tower falling _faster_ than under gravitational acceleration (unless it had a rocket at the top accelerating it downwards)

    Frank

  15. Frank – If you have a vertical structure that fails on one side, you will get massive compression and tension vectors.  Surely the natural evolution is for the tensile side to stretch and break, while the compression side continues to compress, thereby producing a very unbalanced and compounding series of forces.  The top will continue to fall to the side of the compression, thereby exaggerating the effect?  It’s the same as that game [can’t remember its name] where blocks are pulled out from a structure until it falls.  If you pull from the centre, there will be a tendency to collapse vertically, but if the weakness is to one side or the other it will cause an asymmetrical collapse?

  16. “the compression side continues to compress, ”
    If one side is in tension, and the other side is in compression, then the compression forces will have doubled. The whole mass of the building above would be carried by one side.  It would rapidly fail in compression, just like the other side would fail in tension. In the end there’d be a complete failure. The building would have fallen slightly sideways, but only a little.

    But this is really a bit academic with the WTC, because neither tower was leaning when they collapsed. So all the columns would have been in compression. But those in the floors that were on fire would have been losing strength, as steel does. They would have been failing in compression, one by one. I don’t know what safety factors they used, but if it was 3, that would have meant that something like 2/3rds of the columns could have failed before the last 1/3rd of them all failed more or less simultaneously.
    Once this final simultaneous failure occurred, the entire upper building fell very neatly onto the next floor down, whose supporting columns instantaneously also failed.

    The question for me is: why weren’t the WTC buildings leaning at all, in the upper floors above the fire? The answer may be that the internal damage and the fire were concentrated towards the centre. And columns at the 4 corners remained intact right up until the end.

    A few years ago I wrote a simulation model in Java of a cantilever truss in motion.  It’s here. You have to wave the cursor over it to start it. Some day I might try and adapt it to be a tall building (which is also a cantilever), and weaken the columns one by one midway up, and see what happens.

    Frank

  17. In the beginning, I also believed the official explanation but now I’m not so sure. One thing which puzzles me is how the alleged hijackers, after just a few basic flying lessons, were able to manouver huge jetliners and navigate them to their targets with such accuracy. Maybe, just maybe, they could have got lucky and hit one tower, but to hit the other one and also the Pentagon successfully is surely beyond the capability of amateur pilots armed with a few penknives.

  18. The minute I saw that live on the television, I thought of Bin Laden. Now that’s because I follow international politics and current affairs and had read about him a fair bit before 9/11. But I suppose that could be part of the preparation. The press build up this guy as a Pariah and people make the connection automatically. There were numerous reports that he was planning an attack on the U.S.
    And I find the scale of the attack and the fact that there has been virtually no U.S. attack since very strange. Even the London and Madrid bombings were just carried out by fanatics. I’ve long suspected that Al-Qaeda as the CIA would describe it was pure fiction.
    I suppose having grown up in Ireland I’m more aware of the propaganda of war and oppression. When it comes to State control, half of what you are told is true.

  19. Seamus – Actually, flying a large aircraft is relatively simple.  The hardest bit is landing it, and they weren’t concerned by that.  Where I would have questions is concerning their ability to navigate.  Now that is tricky.  You can’t exactly stop and ask directions, and there are no road signs up there.

    Holemaster – I must lead a sheltered life as I had never heard of Bin Laden before the attack.  You are right too about the scale of the attack.  It took an extremely high level of planning to pull off the attack.  There has never been an attack anything like it before, or since.

Hosted by Curratech Blog Hosting
Gravityscan Badge