Good Morning + Happy 9-11 to all of U

[Dr. Shane]

more to come....

Let me say this in a gentle and loving way. Please don't take this like an attack. I know it is hard to come across kind and loving in this form of media but that is how I would like to come across. All you are doing is cutting and pasting stuff from a handful of nuts. It tells us more about you than it does about what happened on 9/11. The issue is settled. Everyone knows what happened. There is no mystery to be solved. Scooby Doo is no where to be found.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

[Paula]

Quote:

Let me say this in a gentle and loving way. Please don't take this like an attack. I know it is hard to come across kind and loving in this form of media but that is how I would like to come across. All you are doing is cutting and pasting stuff from a handful of nuts. It tells us more about you than it does about what happened on 9/11. The issue is settled. Everyone knows what happened. There is no mystery to be solved. Scooby Doo is no where to be found.

And I'm going to say this as lovingly and gently as possible. Your inability to accept the words of trained professionals, the head engineer of the wtc, congressmen and commissioners, etc... etc... simply because it does not support your preconceived ideas also says much about you. An open mind is something that most of us strive for. And just because you declare an issue settled does not really make it so. Anyways.. no hard feelings.. but I certainly disagree with your point of view on this one.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

[Gordon1]

Hi Shane,

WTC Building 7

47 stories collapse in under 7 seconds with perfect symmetry.

Straight down. NO steel construction or even balsa wood could do that without precision planning. Surely you've seen the films. It only takes 7 seconds to watch. NO random fires or bulging girders could ever produce such a beautiful, symmetrical implosion. Even note the center crimp just as it starts. It's a PERFECT match with other demolition projects.

Steel has high tensile strength. It doesn't go without a fight, like more brittle materials. Steel bends and hangs on. Most of those 47 stories were stone cold girders. Likely 80% - 90% of the structure was at ambient temperature. The longest side of the building faced AWAY from the action.

It could NEVER fail symmetrically in 6.5 seconds from random damage. Find a statistician in your team.

Fccool makes the best case: We shouldn't suspend our common sense.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Quote:

Conspiracy theorists say World Trade Center 7 is the best proof for controlled demolition because it wasn't hit by airliners and only had a few fires. They also claim that there was a confession from the building owner who said he "pulled" it. But this is deceptive because while building 7 wasn't hit by an airliner, it was hit by the large perimeter columns of the Tower collapse. It was 400 ft away but the towers were more than 1300 ft tall. As the tower peeled open, it easily tilted over to reach building 7. Below is evidence showing that conspiracy theorists are wrong.

As you can see from the graphic below, all the buildings just as far away from both towers as WTC7 were hit. The others were either very short buildings which didn't have to support a massive load above or had no fire. Only Building 7 had unfought fires and the massive load of 40 stories above them.

source

[Gordon1]

Shane,

Have you ever seen a man-made object sustain random asymmetric damage and then fail suddenly, symmetrically and completely?

Car wrecks?

Plane crashes?

Sinking ships?

Earthquake Buildings?

None of these are neat and tidy. Only controlled demolition fits the bill.

Instant, symmetric, simultaneous destruction with uniform failure and debris.

[Gordon1]

Thanks Pam, that's a good diagram.

Note that Building 7 is on the periphery, outside the direct-hit radius (the 'peel zone' as shown) - On another block in fact. While the closer buildings were really hammered by the Twin Tower debris as indicated in the diagram (accurate or not?), none of them neatly collapsed like Building 7 (though I think they all experienced fires). I've seen images of their skeletal hunks which themselves required controlled demolition in the cleanup phase.

(Quite ironic if this was all one big demolition contract with different phases).

As the diagram shows, WTC 7 is furthest away with it's longest wall (the most steel) on the far side. FYI:

WTC 3 - 22 stories (Marriott Hotel)

WTC 4 - 9 stories

WTC 5 - 9 stories

WTC 6 - 8 stories

For comparison to WTC 7, see the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City. Massive damage to the front half, yet the rear side is intact & standing.

Murrah Building

[Dr. Shane]

Have you ever seen a man-made object sustain random asymmetric damage and then fail suddenly, symmetrically and completely?

This is one of the reasons we have so many conspiracy theories. The only thing we have to compare it to is controlled demolition so people operating outside their area of expertise speculate that this too must of been controlled demolition.

[Dr. Shane]

Note that Building 7 is on the periphery, outside the direct-hit radius...

As the diagram shows, WTC 7 is furthest away with it's longest wall (the most steel) on the far side. FYI:

WTC 3 - 22 stories (Marriott Hotel)

WTC 4 - 9 stories

WTC 5 - 9 stories

WTC 6 - 8 stories

WTC 6 was between WTC 1 and WTC 7. WTC 6 is eight stories high and WTC 7 was 47 stories high. The collapse left a ten story gash in WTC 7.

This is not hard to understand. There is no mystery to be solved.

[John317]

But peoplw don't realy doubt what they hear on tv, and what their government tells them, especially in times of panic.

I don't agree with everything I hear on TV or with what the government tells us, but neither do I jump to conclusion that the government is lying before I see convincing evidence that leads me to believe it is. I'm always open to evidence and reasoning, but I'm almost always very leery of conspiracy theories. For instance, I never did accept Mrs. Clinton's explanation of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" theory.

[Paula]

Hey John,

I don't believe in every conspiracy theory I hear either! And even with 911, there are a lot of theories that I am not convinced of. For example, I DO believe that actual airplanes with ACTUAL passengers went into the towers. As for Shanksville and the Pentagon, I'm not so sure. I do see the possibility that at the Penn site an airplane was actually shot down, and that's why nothing was left. I do not believe an airplane flew into the pentagon. But again, I could be wrong. However, there are other aspects that I do believe. I believe the buildings came down as part of a controlled demolition (that the airplanes were flown into the building as a diversion). I do believe it was a pretext to go to war into oil rich fields, and to indoctrinate that part of the world, and so on and so forth.

I don't believe that those hijackers were necessarily on the airplane (though they may have been), and I certainly don't believe that their passports survived INTACT, as is the official story.. lol..

Anyways, there are many conspiracy theories out there that I do not subscribe to, nor would I encourage anyone to subscribe to!!

[John317]

OK, that is a pretty impressive list of people. But the only thing that really matters are the reasons they give for arriving at the conclusions they've reached about 9/11. Most of those reasons and the evidence they used to reach their conclusions are not discussed in your list. I would need to examine closely what these men say and why they say it, comparing it with all the facts that we know.

I think it's important to understand from the start that in this kind of situation, we're not going to be able to make "sense" of everything that happened. You can expects lots of confusion and contraditions, just like there was in the Kennedy assassination. But it's a mistake to draw the conclusion that there was a conspiracy on the part of the government simply because there are things that don't seem to make sense or that not everything has been explained satisfactorily. The full truth is often not completely sensible and seems to be sometimes full of contraditions when all the details are examined closely. That's partly because in this kind of event, there are so many different viewpoints, including exaggerations, conjectures, misinformation, half-truths, unreliable reports and, yes, even some lies.

Remember, also, that it's possible to give quite an impressive list of scientists who don't believe God made the world. But when we examine their reasons for their conclusions and the full evidence, we see reason to doubt them. That could be the case with the cause of 9/11 as well, don't you agree?

[John317]

Anyways.. the point is... we are to be peaceful, loving and a light to the world. We are not to encourage violence. But we are to seek out truth!!!

Yes, we agree here, of course.

So let us seek out the truth.

Are you convinced that the President of the United States conspired to destroy those buildings and all those people? If not the president, who or what organizations?

I would like to see a post by you in which you list the most important reasons and the primary evidence for those reasons for believing what you do about 9/11. (You might summarize evidence and give the source or reference if you need to.)

[jasd]

QR frame:

Quote:

...we are to be peaceful, loving and a light to the world. We are not to encourage violence.

Indeed!—else why did Jesus Christ adjure His disciples to sell their garments and buy swords? One hardly thinks it was for the purpose of weighing upon the hip as to cause the appearance of a limp – without the necessity of hamstringing – as were many and sundry prophets and priests of old.

Quote:

Without the fireproofing, the steel will fail at lower temperatures, which is obviously what happened with WTC 1 & 2.

Obviously? As I recall, the second plane crashed into the NE corner of the South building with almost the entirety of its fuel load – blowing off as a fireball into the ether. That reads:

Corner, which necessitates a special kind of physics to cause such a burn as to precipitate a ‘Pancake Collapse’ of the Tower. Pardon my limited grasp of physics, but should the Towers have actually collapsed due to kerosene and drywall fires...,

rather than a Pancake Collapse, the collapse of the upper stories of the building should have been more skewed – a toppling if you will – rather than, as seemingly orchestrated – an equilibrate collapse... (strange, that both crashes occurring in such different aspects to the buildings – should cause the same sort of symmetrical ‘collapse’)

Quote:

...knocking off the fireproofing,

Re the “knocking off the fireproofing”: we know that HOW?—seems more mantra than science, yes?—I mean, the way it is asserted – one imagines that all the steel columns lost their ‘fireproofing’ simultaneously and weakened simultaneously – causing an equilibrate collapse...

Sounds like conspiracy, yes?

The above noted, and in confidence – sotto voce: actually, it was David Copperfield who caused the seeming crash of the Towers (they’re still there!). Come December 21, 2012 – he will cause them to reappear on Nat’l Television – whilst Las Vegas disappears. Watch for it! The Mayans knew...

It is Magick! : (

...me so just kidding!—lobotomized on the pre-October side of my hill – by barley and mead, corn, rye, and mash.

[Paula]

QR frame:

Quote:

...we are to be peaceful, loving and a light to the world. We are not to encourage violence.

Indeed!—else why did Jesus Christ adjure His disciples to sell their garments and buy swords? One hardly thinks it was for the purpose of weighing upon the hip as to cause the appearance of a limp – without the necessity of hamstringing – as were many and sundry prophets and priests of old.

Quote:

Without the fireproofing, the steel will fail at lower temperatures, which is obviously what happened with WTC 1 & 2.

Obviously? As I recall, the second plane crashed into the NE corner of the South building with almost the entirety of its fuel load – blowing off as a fireball into the ether. That reads:

Corner, which necessitates a special kind of physics to cause such a burn as to precipitate a ‘Pancake Collapse’ of the Tower. Pardon my limited grasp of physics, but should the Towers have actually collapsed due to kerosene and drywall fires...,

rather than a Pancake Collapse, the collapse of the upper stories of the building should have been more skewed – a toppling if you will – rather than, as seemingly orchestrated – an equilibrate collapse... (strange, that both crashes occurring in such different aspects to the buildings – should cause the same sort of symmetrical ‘collapse’)

Quote:

...knocking off the fireproofing,

Re the “knocking off the fireproofing”: we know that HOW?—seems more mantra than science, yes?—I mean, the way it is asserted – one imagines that all the steel columns lost their ‘fireproofing’ simultaneously and weakened simultaneously – causing an equilibrate collapse...

Sounds like conspiracy, yes?

The above noted, and in confidence – sotto voce: actually, it was David Copperfield who caused the seeming crash of the Towers (they’re still there!). Come December 21, 2012 – he will cause them to reappear on Nat’l Television – whilst Las Vegas disappears. Watch for it! The Mayans knew...

It is Magick! : (

...me so just kidding!—lobotomized on the pre-October side of my hill – by barley and mead, corn, rye, and mash.

lol!!! Thank you for bringing some sense into this conversation... especially over the knocked off fireproofing "mantra" as you call it!! lol...

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Re the “knocking off the fireproofing”: we know that HOW?—seems more mantra than science, yes?

Perhaps some people here do not know what fireproofing is. It is a type of insulation that is blown onto steel which protects steel from the high temperatures during a fire. It extends the life of a building during a fire. Many times, if the fire isn't put out in time, the steel will still fail, even with fireproofing.

Once the steel is covered with the fireproofing, masonry or drywall is used to cover the steel so that the occupants of the building do not actually see the fireproofing material.

There is more than one type of fireproofing. Some are more sticky than others. In fact, in the past dozen years, we have gotten much better products on the market. Many types of fireproofing would fall off the steal if the steel was impacted with a crash.

Again, for those of us that understand the industry, this stuff is very basic. I have had to sweep up fireproofing that fell off from columns and beams during the construction process. I have no doubt that lots of it fell off as the planes crashed into the towers.

[Bravus]

Message to all: http://xkcd.com/258/

[Dr. Shane]

Another thing many may not realize is that steel has failed in many fires. However most steel that fails in a building fire are in small buildings and there isn't enough weight on them to cause the entire building to fall down. Steel beams are left sagging. Steel columns are left bulging. These are the tell-tale signs that the steel has failed and is quite common after a fire in a building with a steel structure.

[Tom Wetmore]

I do not believe an airplane flew into the pentagon...

[Paula]

Hey Tom!!!

I have no problem admitting that there is a possibility that a plane hit the pentagon. I still remain skeptical if for no other reason than the unwillingness of the government to show

ANY footage of an actual airplane hitting the pentagon. However, I do not discount the possibility that an airplane was in fact involved.

[Tom Wetmore]

[Tom Wetmore]

[Paula]

Hey Tom!

I think you can find other points of view in regards to this. For example:

[Paula]