9-11 conspiracy theories.. Osama innocent?

How many out there are familiar with the work of Steven Jones?
what really brought the towers down on 9-11?
worth the watch...
IF YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH WHAT IS SUGGESTED HERE - POST PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES, AND ACTUAL EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS - RATHER THAN RESORTING TO NAME-CALLING? saying "he is a crack pot" does not debunk what has been shown... Thank you

part 1: [youtube]UFLBeN38KLg[/youtube]
YouTube - 9/11: Science and Society with Dr Steven E. Jones part 1 of 8


for parts 2-8 do a search for:
[youtube]YpNeWU8UewE[/youtube]
Dr. Steven E. Jones: 9/11 "Last Lecture" | Part 2
- why did the EPA mislead people about the caustic nature of the dust?
- insider trading prior to 9-11 - $15 billion made off of the deaths of others on the stock market

[youtube]1H7ErSDywI0[/youtube]
Dr. Steven E. Jones: 9/11 "Last Lecture" | Part 3
emergency personal and equipment in place the night before 9-11
air defenses put on hold... "the plane is 50 miles out (obviously off coarse)... the plane is 30 miles out... the plane is 10 miles out... ****Mr. VP ( cheney) - do the orders still stand? - of coarse the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary?... 180 lives lost after an hour of purposefully with-holding info... they were tracking the plane for an hour...

physics - showing bldg 7 was obviously a demo job...

[youtube]kBjnbHj1BZI[/youtube]
Dr. Steven E. Jones: 9/11 "Last Lecture" | Part 4
bldg 7: NIST report - not due to the flying debris, not due to fuel fires, ...
accelerated fall - not free fall, not fire-induced fall - but an accelerated fall which can only be attained through explosives.. a = g... free-fall... (the only way to get free fall is if the roof was falling through thin air - the roof was not falling through thin air, it was falling through reinforced concrete/iron columns/walls/ -


[youtube]NYEEiQdRUdg[/youtube]
Dr. Steven E. Jones: 9/11 "Last Lecture" | Part 5
bldg 7 was not hit by any airplanes...
look at controlled demolitions...
high T (see metal) = temps far above what an office fire could have produced. NIST refused to look at the steel from the buildings which show what temps were present in the building...
thermite + sulpher residue in debris...
jet fuel not sufficient to create the heat needed to melt steel supports.
freefall observed for larger towers too...

[youtube]oPSSyDnQkR0[/youtube]

another showing bldg7 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqSh4_DcPzU&feature=player_embedded


Dr. Steven E. Jones: 9/11 "Last Lecture" | Part 6
a look at the thermite used... there was some ingenious materials engineering involved - not your e-bay run of the mill explosive... some serious engineering involved in making this stuff...

[youtube]m6ey5i0UD8g[/youtube]
Dr. Steven E. Jones: 9/11 "Last Lecture" | Part 7
shaped charges... D.O.D. materials...LANL reports... where were the explosives made?
ppl fired by cheney etc. etc.

[youtube]MVtzsRFGN1o[/youtube]
Dr. Steven E. Jones: 9/11 "Last Lecture" | Part 8
What happened at your university? (BYU)

The 9/11 conspiracy theories are totally wrong! Conspiracy theorists cannot answer what happened to the passengers on those flights, why they did not return home.

i congratulate you on the wonderful thread you have opened. an innocent man was and is blamed for something he never did.

The most powerful argument against such conspiracy theories is that our government isn't competent & disciplined enuf to carry out such sophisticated acts & keep it secret.
The 2nd most convincing argument is that you could never hide the rigging of demolition explosives from the landlord.
I saw the movies of the planes hitting the buildings. I'm familiar with the structural failure which occurred.
That's good enuf for me to blame the guys who commandeered the planes.
For those who want to blame Bush instead of Usama & crew, I accept that I cannot ever convince you otherwise.
I only ask that you not claim that there's engineering expertise behind such a load of sublithic coprolites.
Any of you ready to discuss metalurgy & structural failure modes?

idea said:

[youtube]NYEEiQdRUdg[/youtube]
Dr. Steven E. Jones: 9/11 "Last Lecture" | Part 5
bldg 7 was not hit by any airplanes...
look at controlled demolitions...

Click to expand...

I touched on this in another thread. Are you suggesting that:

- WTC 1 collapsed due to an airplane strike
- WTC 2 collapsed due to an airplane strike
- WTC 7, coincidentally, was demolished with explosives at the same time.

Is that right?

idea said:

high T (see metal) = temps far above what an office fire could have produced.

Click to expand...

That's not correct. A regular office fire, if allowed to continue, is more than enough to damage structural steel to the point of failure. This was well-established long before 9/11.

He talked about wood and paper in his stove as being "like an office fire". That's not true:

- a stove is made to radiate heat. The problem with a building fire is that the walls, floor and ceiling reflect heat back in toward the fire. This increases the temperature.

- office fires aren't just about wooden desks and the paper on them. Offices have all sorts of petroleum-based products in them, many of which burn at very high temperatures: carpets, foam padded furniture, plastic computer cases, etc.

- even in his "wood stove" example, air can play a huge role in how hot a fire burns. If you took his unthreatening wood stove, pointed a big bellows at it and started pumping air at it, you'd see the fire get very hot very quickly. This is how a blast furnace works: the heat isn't so much a matter of the fuel, but the fact that the fire is supplied with a large volume of air. And the convection currents created by a large fire can induce a "blast furnace"-like effect.

But just to back up, I didn't watch the video all the way through, so I may have missed it, but you did say that the steel shows signs that it was heated above the temperature that an office fire could produce. This implies that you know:

- the temperature (i.e. an actual value) indicated by the damage to the steel.
- the maximum temperature (i.e. an actual value) that an office fire can produce.

Could you give us both of these numbers, please?

9-10ths_Penguin said:

I touched on this in another thread. Are you suggesting that:

- WTC 1 collapsed due to an airplane strike
- WTC 2 collapsed due to an airplane strike
- WTC 7, coincidentally, was demolished with explosives at the same time.

Click to expand...

you forgot the real option,
- they were all demolished at the same time.

don't tell me you believe a building would fall to the ground in the way the twin towers did just because an airplane crashed into them and exploded.

Are people this stupid to believe an incredible conspiracy theory,an Aeroplane travelling at that speed was enough to do the damage,i've seen a building demolished by explosives,the amount of cables and shielding that controls the blast might just be a giveaway.

England my lionheart said:

Are people this stupid to believe an incredible conspiracy theory,an Aeroplane travelling at that speed was enough to do the damage,i've seen a building demolished by explosives,the amount of cables and shielding that controls the blast might just be a giveaway.

Click to expand...

then please step out into the modern world where we use signal stansmiters (remote controls) to control things without any cables and wires showing. but wishful thinking is wishful thinking.

eselam said:

you forgot the real option,

Click to expand...

What do you mean by "real" option?

eselam said:

then please step out into the modern world where we use signal stansmiters (remote controls) to control things without any cables and wires showing. but wishful thinking is wishful thinking.

Click to expand...

Mestemia said:

What do you mean by "real" option?

Click to expand...

all three towers came down as a result of controlled demolition. witnesses that were there when they collapsed ranging from civilians to reporters to police say they heard secondary explosions and mini bomb sounds (they say something similar) right at the time when they started collapsing, which ever tower it was the came down first.

eselam said:

then please step out into the modern world where we use signal stansmiters (remote controls) to control things without any cables and wires showing. but wishful thinking is wishful thinking.

Click to expand...

Have you ever seen what's involved in rigging up a building with explosives for controlled demolition?

eselam said:

all three towers came down as a result of controlled demolition.

Click to expand...

Source please.

eselam said:

witnesses that were there when they collapsed ranging from civilians to reporters to police say they heard secondary explosions and mini bomb sounds (they say something similar) right at the time when they started collapsing, which ever tower it was the came down first.

Click to expand...

Source please.

Revoltingest said:

Have you ever seen what's involved in rigging up a building with explosives for controlled demolition?

Click to expand...

i have seen parts/fragments, but not the whole process. but i have also seen buildings hit by airplanes before that never came down like this.

just for those who want to watch it:

[youtube]duVQ23c6-rE[/youtube]
YouTube - Cutter Charge Sounds Heard During WTC 2 Collapse On 9/11?

eselam said:

you forgot the real option,
- they were all demolished at the same time.

Click to expand...

So... they blew up the building with explosives after crashing planes into them? Why would they need the planes, then?

I mean, if it was just a matter of wanting to pin the attack on Al Qaeda, then a car or truck bomb would've worked just fine as an excuse - after all, Al Qaeda already tried to take down the one tower with a bomb in the parking garage several years before.

eselam said:

don't tell me you believe a building would fall to the ground in the way the twin towers did just because an airplane crashed into them and exploded.

Click to expand...

Yes.

eselam said:

i have seen parts/fragments, but not the whole process. but i have also seen buildings hit by airplanes before that never came down like this.

Click to expand...

And I've seen buildings rigged for explosive demolition that didn't come down either; what's your point?

eselam said:

then please step out into the modern world where we use signal stansmiters (remote controls) to control things without any cables and wires showing. but wishful thinking is wishful thinking.

Click to expand...

Theres a lot more involved in a controlled demolition than strapping some plastic onto a building,there is lots of drilling and some physical demolition before any explosives are put in place,so do some research and think about it,instead of having Aeroplanes fly into buildings they could by your reasoning just have blown the Twin Towers up and blamed some Terrorist organisation,so in fact it makes no sense.

I know you think your Holy Warrior wasn't guilty but BBC NEWS | Middle East | Bin Laden '9/11 video' broadcast

Mestemia said:

Source please.

YouTube - Cutter Charge Sounds Heard During WTC 2 Collapse On 9/11?

Source please.

Click to expand...

[youtube]8n-nT-luFIw[/youtube]
YouTube - 9/11: Total Proof That Bombs Were Planted In The Buildings!

eselam said:

just for those who want to watch it:

[youtube]duVQ23c6-rE[/youtube]
YouTube - Cutter Charge Sounds Heard During WTC 2 Collapse On 9/11?

Click to expand...

You do realize that when a piece of structural steel fails while under a heavy load, it goes "bang" too, right?

But just so I get what you're suggesting: are you saying that WTC 2 had "cutter charges" installed? This would imply that at some point in the building, the structural elements were wrapped with explosives. Why didn't anyone in the building report this? Were the victims in on the conspiracy, too?

If you google Osama's FBI wanted poster you'll see that 9/11 isn't listed among his suspected offenses. As much as they'd like to attribute it to him, the evidence apparently isn't there.