(May 2, 2012 at 12:43 am)Christi Wrote: Not only were they able to take control of 4 planes, they were able to get 3 of them to their targets. Where was the Air Force? The Air Force never responded until after all of the damage had been done.

The Air Force did not know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._milita...11_attacks

---

(May 2, 2012 at 12:48 am)jackman Wrote: water's viscosity isn't important in cooling the metal enough to delay the heating @ fail temps.

Fuck yeah it is. Unless we're talking a pond, which we are not. Spraying water will run off too fast. It wouldn't be surrounding the metal. It would be willy fucking nilly or resting on the floor.

Quote:water that cools heated metal when forging swords isn't viscous, but it cools that red hot iron immediately to black.

When it is dunked in water. You don't need viscosity if you are going to dunk. If you are going to spray you need it. That is why I used a metal lathe as an example. It sprays coolant that is as thick as oil so it doesn't just run off into the catch.

Quote:ok, well, i can't work on the guesses. i know there should be a sprinkler head every 400sf. there should be a damper at every vertical pipe, duct, penetration between floors and firestop at every horizontal penetration, duct, pipe. basically, buildings are built to contain a fire in one space, then wet it out. risers aren't placed at the exterior of a building, they're usually in the core (better insulated against weather is more efficient for heating/cooling). i doubt very few of the water supply was compromised. this would be horrible judgment on the designers' behalf.

Did you see how far the planes went in? At any rate, it doesn't matter about the risers. Without the verticals, the water would not have been able to go anywhere. Those sprinklers are not made to withstand impact and fire. They are made to put out fires.

Quote:hey, perhaps none of the systems implemented to prevent spread of fire, worked this day. i'd just be inclined to bet otherwise.

I would not. They are implemented to prevent the spread of fire. They are not made to put out fires after the pipes have been struck by a freaking airplane.

Quote:Christi wrote

They don't appear to be the brightest and had never been able to carry out large acts like this before. Then one day, everything goes right for them, and they are able to pull something off like 9/11. It just doesn't make sense.

Exactly, we all know Osama Bin Laden had strong ties to the CIA.

And how did they find the passport of one of the hijackers in all the rubble of the Twin towers? That is preposterous to believe! Oh everything was pulverizered to fine dust except for a plastic card that was on a hijacker from the plane that got incinerated on impact. Get the fuck out of here! That is like finding a needle in a million haystacks, of which how did the passport even stay intact and legible if it was in such an extremely hot fire?????? Obviously, this passport was planted. I call that common sense! Score one for 911 truthers! BAM!

It is a little strange that the buildings did go down so easy, for example even since it did get hot enough to essentially melt the center column in both buildings how did the center column on the floors below get crushed. Even from the sheer force from the floors above I'm not sure it would be enough to bring down the center columns below. Those things are thick as hell(25 meters squared in area), it is interesting to think about.

@Bgood
It wasn't simply a regular fire. The heat was enough to completely melt the metal columns at the center of the building because of the planes being almost completely full of jet fuel+the kinetic energy.

However, I still think it is possible that the fire's did spread enough and bring down enough weight to bring the rest of the building down. And I am unwilling to accept a conspiracy theory which makes so many unsubstantial assumptions in regard to the government among other things... Simply not enough reason here.

ok, so we disagree. now that we're parsing sentences, it's gotten past my interest to pursue trying to make my point. bgood is right, the debates have gotten past the big picture, which is more important. it's all cool.

time to go look at some porn and hit this fuckin electric cigarette i bought as a substitute for my cigars, after hearin the commotion about it. it's cool but does me no good, since i don't inhale cigars. i don't need it.

about the Illuminati, anyone know anything, now that is interesting...

How is the big picture more important than the details? That is so absurd. The big picture is made up of the details. Those unwilling to "parse sentences" are, to my mind, those unwilling to actually sort through the facts. It is easy to have a preconceived notion and a preference for the outcome. It is, again to my mind, very uncool to make wide-sweeping claims based on these notions and preferences and then refuse to acknowledge the details that really make up the entire scenario.

"Hey, who cares if the details don't match up? The governments is mean! That's the big picture and I'm sticking to it." Fuck that.

Quote:BrotherMagnet wrote
@Bgood
It wasn't simply a regular fire. The heat was enough to completely melt the metal columns at the center of the building because of the planes being almost completely full of jet fuel+the kinetic energy.

Then why did WTC7 collapse at nearly free fall speed? There was no jet fuel or kinetic energy involved there. OOOHHH yeah hot-ass fires did it, OKAY

Fires in and off them selves don't bring down skyscrapers, not to mention "demolition" style. I think you guys dwell on the so-called debunking evidence because you don't won't to believe that our government would do something so horrendous. It would shake your "faith" too much in whatever you have faith in.

I mean this is just the tip of the iceberg. There are literally hundreds of inconsistencies and "coincidences" that point to the complete unntruth of the official story! In a court of law there would be endles amounts of circumstantial evidence, but none of the witnesses would be allowed to be heard. WTF.

Research Great Britain's terrorist attack on 7-7. There are also many strange things that point to a conspiracy there also. So it is much bigger than just Bush and Cheney.

But saying they just didn't know doesn't make it right nor does it make sense. Four planes get hijacked and the Air Force just doesn't know? So the FAA is in charge of national security then? Oh, the Air Force has no knowledge, because the FAA didn't tell them there was a hijacking. I suppose it's really the pilots fault, because they weren't able to radio the FAA and tell them that the plane was being hijacked. That must mean that everyone just thinks a hijacker is going to allow the pilot to notify control that a plane is being hijacked. "I am going to hijack the plane, please notify control, so they in turn will notify the FAA who will then notify the Air Force. I will wait to take over until you do this."

You seriously can't get me to believe that our defense was really that stupid and poorly planned out. There was definitely insiders behind this.

Yeah, what about that third building that went down? It had barely any damage to it, and no planes were in it. Yet, it went down nice and smooth as the other two. I can somewhat understand the others as we really don't know with them, but that third building was a bit obvious.

*sigh*

I very much have no problem admitting it if the government was fucked up. I, for one, would thoroughly enjoy a proper revolution. They are my favorite. However, I'm not a fucking gullible knucklehead. If I'm going to have an excuse to loathe the government, it damn well better be a valid one, not some horseshit heaped on the graves of thousands of people.

---

(May 2, 2012 at 1:29 am)Christi Wrote: But saying they just didn't know doesn't make it right nor does it make sense. Four planes get hijacked and the Air Force just doesn't know? So the FAA is in charge of national security then? Oh, the Air Force has no knowledge, because the FAA didn't tell them there was a hijacking. I suppose it's really the pilots fault, because they weren't able to radio the FAA and tell them that the plane was being hijacked. That must mean that everyone just thinks a hijacker is going to allow the pilot to notify control that a plane is being hijacked. "I am going to hijack the plane, please notify control, so they in turn will notify the FAA who will then notify the Air Force. I will wait to take over until you do this."

You seriously can't get me to believe that our defense was really that stupid and poorly planned out. There was definitely insiders behind this.

Um, our defense does not consist of tracking every single passenger airliner. It is not stupid or poorly planned out. Logistically, it is ludicrous to track every plane. Furthermore, that is the job of the FAA, not the fucking Air Force. I would also like to add that your truncated version of it is nowhere near what actually happened.

@Bgood
Wow..., I don't think you understood one word I said. It wasn't the fire which melted the inner column. It was pure heat(more like an explosion from within the building is a better way to describe it) from the impact:jet fuel+heat+kinetic energy = very bad day.

What evidence do you have that would stand up in even an "unbiased" as you would say, court of law?