You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. There are just as many experts who say the official story is BS as there are confirming it.
I'd love you to list the names and credentials of these "experts". In all the WTC conspiracy theory crap I've read it's idiots mis-quoting the experts and twisting their words to fit their ridiculous theories.
So why not name names? Give us links to these experts so we can read what they have to say and make our own judgement, rather then telling us "the experts said so, therefore it must be true".
As to the Pyrocool, it's very relevant. The same people you're getting your conspiracy information from subscribe to the theory Pyrocool was used to hide evidence of thermite. This is easy to prove wrong. So if your "experts" are so utterly wrong on this issue, how can you trust them to be right on other issues? How could an "expert" not even understand something so simple as the fact that thermite doesn't emit UV after it's fnished "burning"?
It's like asking your "expert" to tell me what 2+2 is and he guesses 5, but then tell me I should listen to his theories on the strucutal analysis of the WTC towers.
This is how you guys think:
- Pyrocool was used on the WTC wreckage.
- Pyrocool absorbs UV radiation.
- Thermite emits UV radiation.
- Conclusion: There's thermite in the WTC wreckage.
Why would thermite be present in the WTC? Could only be for demolition purposes.
- Pyrocool was used on the WTC wreckage.
- Pyrocool absorbs UV radiation.
- Thermite emits UV radiation.
- Conclusion: There's thermite in the WTC wreckage.
Why would thermite be present in the WTC? Could only be for demolition purposes.
Mythbusters also uses it. Did you see that episode where the thermite burns through all those layers of metal? That's like a mini WTC!
OH MY GOD THE MYTHBUSTERS BLEW UP THE WTC!!!
__________________ 1991 Toyota Celica GTFour RC // 2007 Toyota Rav4 V6 // 2000 Jeep Grand Cherokee
1992 Toyota Celica GT-S ["sold"] \\ 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee CRD [sold] \\ 2000 Jeep Cherokee [sold] \\ 1997 Honda Prelude [sold] \\ 1992 Jeep YJ [sold/crashed] \\ 1987 Mazda RX-7 [sold] \\ 1987 Toyota Celica GT-S [crushed]
Quote:
Originally Posted by maksimizer
half those dudes are hotter than ,my GF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevYouUp
reading this thread is like waiting for goku to charge up a spirit bomb in dragon ball z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good_KarMa
OH thank god. I thought u had sex with my wife. :cry:
I just realized something looking at this picture. The conspiracy guys are always saying the towers came down at "free fall" speed, which they say is impossible.
So in this picture I see debris on the bottom right that is several stories below the tower. Is this debris falling faster than what gravity will allow? How is it possible for debris to be ahead of the free-falling tower? Do the laws of physics not apply to this debris?
So in this picture I see debris on the bottom right that is several stories below the tower. Is this debris falling faster than what gravity will allow? How is it possible for debris to be ahead of the free-falling tower? Do the laws of physics not apply to this debris?
that's not even relevant. the laws of physics state that 2 objects, no matter the mass, will fall at the same rate of speed, yes. but that is assuming they are dropped from the same height. given that the debris "exploded" (blew outward, upward, etc), it's not even something you can compare given that the building and the debris did not fall from the same height
keep in mind the tower has to fall to create debris, too. meaning while the tower was already in motion, the debris was only then being created to start their fall
that's not even relevant. the laws of physics state that 2 objects, no matter the mass, will fall at the same rate of speed, yes. but that is assuming they are dropped from the same height. given that the debris "exploded" (blew outward, upward, etc), it's not even something you can compare given that the building and the debris did not fall from the same height
keep in mind the tower has to fall to create debris, too. meaning while the tower was already in motion, the debris was only then being created to start their fall
So what falls faster, a feather or an equal weight of lead?
Someone with deep pockets needs to build a tower and fly a plane into it. Then we will know and end all this BS.
OK so if we found out the the Americans had more than a helping hand in all this, how does it really effect us as Canadians, Vancouverites??? To 90% of this forum it doesn't change shit. Other than a shit load of band wagon jumpers.
it isn't like it hasn't happened before, a plane's been flown into the empire state
A WW2-era B-25 bomber flying into the Empire State Building is slightly different than a Boeing 767 trans-continental passenger plane flying into one of the Twin Towers...
well like you said, it depends on the air resistance
if anything, you're just agreeing with me that that's why the debris wasn't falling
Actually, you're misinterpreting the data. I am saying that there are many factors your simplified analogy is leaving out. I am not a physicist, so I am not one to judge what 'is' or 'isn't' possible. Am I blind? No. Stupid? Depends who you ask. I am not swayed, however, by doubt. Show me proof, show me evidence.
Where are or were the explosives? Why did nobody see them being set up? Why was the building demolished from the top down instead of the bottom up? Most importantly, how can you believe that so many THOUSANDS of people have managed to keep these secrets?
A WW2-era B-25 bomber flying into the Empire State Building is slightly different than a Boeing 767 trans-continental passenger plane flying into one of the Twin Towers...
The post I was replying to stated that we should "build a tower and fly a plane into it"
Empire state building, WTC both fit under that category.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graeme S
Actually, you're misinterpreting the data. I am saying that there are many factors your simplified analogy is leaving out. I am not a physicist, so I am not one to judge what 'is' or 'isn't' possible. Am I blind? No. Stupid? Depends who you ask. I am not swayed, however, by doubt. Show me proof, show me evidence.
Where are or were the explosives? Why did nobody see them being set up? Why was the building demolished from the top down instead of the bottom up? Most importantly, how can you believe that so many THOUSANDS of people have managed to keep these secrets?
I don't think you understand what my post was getting at. I was replying to this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericthehalfbee
I just realized something looking at this picture. The conspiracy guys are always saying the towers came down at "free fall" speed, which they say is impossible.
So in this picture I see debris on the bottom right that is several stories below the tower. Is this debris falling faster than what gravity will allow? How is it possible for debris to be ahead of the free-falling tower? Do the laws of physics not apply to this debris?
and ONLY this. I said nothing of the building being demolished in a controlled fashion. the only word that I said that could be misinterpreted is the word "exploded", in which I meant the resulting explosion from the plane hitting the WTC
regardless, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. you believe what you want, and everybody else can believe what they want
it isn't like it hasn't happened before, a plane's been flown into the empire state
An engineer once said: "Anyone can make a bridge to carry a certain load. A smart engineer will build a bridge that can just carry a certain load."
The Empire State Building was over-built since engineers back then didn't have as good an understanding of materials. If it was built today, they'd use 1/3 the amount of steel. The Empire State is a tank of a building, grossly over-built.
The World Trade Centre towers weigh in at about 35% more than the Empire State, despite being just over twice as large in terms of size and floor space. The WTC towers actually used less steel than the Empire State, again despite being over twice as large.
A B-25 has a max weight of around 13-14 tons, and can carry 874 US gallons of fuel. Max speed is 285 MPH.
A 767-200 has a max weight of 150-180 tons, and can carry 24,800 US gallons of fuel. Max speed is 530 MPH.
So the 767 that hit the WTC has a weight that is about 12 times that of a B-25. And it travels much faster than the B-25. The kinetic energy release by the 767 into the WTC (factoring plane mass and speed) is easily over 20 times that of the B-25.
So we have 20 times the energy going into a building (WTC) that is constructed weaker than the Empire State.
Oh, and there's the fuel. The 767 carries 27 times the amount of fuel as the B-25.
But yeah, I can see why you'd compare them. I mean, having 20 times the kinetic energy hitting the WTC and 27 times the fuel isn't really going to be that much worse than a B-25 into the Empire State.
An engineer once said: "Anyone can make a bridge to carry a certain load. A smart engineer will build a bridge that can just carry a certain load."
The Empire State Building was over-built since engineers back then didn't have as good an understanding of materials. If it was built today, they'd use 1/3 the amount of steel. The Empire State is a tank of a building, grossly over-built.
The World Trade Centre towers weigh in at about 35% more than the Empire State, despite being just over twice as large in terms of size and floor space. The WTC towers actually used less steel than the Empire State, again despite being over twice as large.
A B-25 has a max weight of around 13-14 tons, and can carry 874 US gallons of fuel. Max speed is 285 MPH.
A 767-200 has a max weight of 150-180 tons, and can carry 24,800 US gallons of fuel. Max speed is 530 MPH.
So the 767 that hit the WTC has a weight that is about 12 times that of a B-25. And it travels much faster than the B-25. The kinetic energy release by the 767 into the WTC (factoring plane mass and speed) is easily over 20 times that of the B-25.
So we have 20 times the energy going into a building (WTC) that is constructed weaker than the Empire State.
Oh, and there's the fuel. The 767 carries 27 times the amount of fuel as the B-25.
But yeah, I can see why you'd compare them. I mean, having 20 times the kinetic energy hitting the WTC and 27 times the fuel isn't really going to be that much worse than a B-25 into the Empire State.
Except that the WTC was tested to be able to withstand more kinetic energy then what the 767 could produce.. Go look in the Joe Rogan thread. I posted the numbers there.
The 767 was also only carrying about 10,000 gallons of fuel...
The WTC was designed to withstand an impact from a 707 at 600 mph. They say the 767 hit the building at around 466 mph..
And just so nobody can say that I'm getting my info from "truther" websites..
Seattle Times article from 1993 when the WTC was bombed
I only answer to my username, my real name is Irrelevant!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 25,687
Thanked 10,397 Times in 3,920 Posts
Failed 1,390 Times in 625 Posts
something definitely isn't right about the whole situation but i doubt we'll ever know what or why
I don't believe there's a global terrorist syndicate in cahoots with all other forms of crime and criminal organizations in the world though... (look at every international crime; hell even local crime they tie it alllll back with AlQaeda.... come on)
That sounds like they're trying to get people to believe that COBRA actually exists and is possible and Bin Laden is Cobra Commander
There are people out there, in much higher and more powerful places then we are, that will make sure things stay so convoluted and unintelligible that people like you and I will never be able to unravel the mess and see what really happened....and by the time we do, so much time would've passed that we simply don't care anymore. The answer is so painfully obvious, but to PROVE it - it's simply too complicated, too much hard work. There's a lot going on out there in this world. And people like you and I can just never connect A to B.
If I had to send a message to the American people in the future based on things I've seen in my life so far, I would say: Get a gun, learn to shoot it well, and hope the day never comes you have to use it to defend yourself against a corrupt government.
__________________ Moderator Vancouver Automotive Chat | Vancouver Off-Topic
__________________
REVscene.net - Vancouver's #1 Automotive Forum and Classified's Site!
Interested in advertising with REVSCENE? Join our roster of Brian Jessel BMW, EBISU Robson, Blitz Gear, Soundworks, and dozens of the Lower Mainlands BUSIEST and most SUCCESSFUL small and medium businesses! Let us take you to the next level with our Incredibly affordable and effective packages Advertisement@revscene.net
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
and Bin Laden is Cobra Commander
