It's not a conspiracy

[PreKe]

Hit and run:

A common tactic employed by 9/11 Truthers, Creationists, and other kooks.

What happens is that the kook bombards a discussion with countless claims. The kook might then attempt to reply to a few posts before said kook realizes that he or she is unable to defend his or her position, and therefore stops responding.

However, they usually return later to repeat the same thing all over again.

That way, the kook gets to plant his or her propaganda, and won't have to answer to factual errors, contradictions, and so on.

Related tactic: "Gish Gallop"

[hdood]

The fact that planes can't collapse buildings should be enough to turn heads.

First of all, planes can cause buildings to collapse if they cause the right structural damage. Second, it was not the planes impacting alone that caused the buildings to collapse. The impact caused some damage, but also started fires that were allowed to continue to burn until they caused the steel floors to weaken and pull the outer (perimeter) columns inwards until it collapsed. At that point gravity took over. The rest of the buildings which were not designed to handle that kind of load and thus naturally offered little resistance. The WTC was unique in that the only support the floors had were the inner core and the perimeter columns.

Or that there was no debre from a plane in pennsylvania.

Actually, over 95% of the plane's mass was recovered and returned to the airline. I don't think you should be mocking the people involved in the impressive recovery work.

Forget what the truthers say. Its about facts.

No, it's about aggrandizing you.

They fell too soon and the one that got hit second fell first.

Because the planes hit differently and the fires were different.

I have no need to start a flame war to defend my common sense.

The problem is that "common sense" is not actually enough when discussing technical subjects. It requires a certain level of knowledge.

[PreKe]

Also, I'm educated enough. I have done a ton of research for school reports on this. It just depresses me to keep having to dig all that stuff up again. I'm tired of doing research to prove myself "correct"

You didn't even know about the plane debris in Pennsylvania. You have clearly not done any research.

You make the claims, you produce the evidence. If you are tired of "proving yourself correct", stop making claims.

If you care so much why I think what I think why don't you go look it up? All I did was make a comment. If you don't believe what I believe that's your problem not mine.

I have already looked up all these bogus Truther claims in the past. I know most of them already. I have seen countless discussions on this subject.

Again: Please explain exactly why a plane could not cause a building to collapse.

As for educating myself. Do research and come back and tell me I'm wrong. ANd please don't bring up the "pancake theory"

I have already explained how you are wrong. You have failed to address any of my points.

[Howling Wind]

I'm not a 9/11 truther. I never meant to start a debate and you are the kind of people that make me half scared to pull up evidence. Or do all the research again. If you've got a problem with me I suggest you get on with it and stop acting like a total jerk and calling me a truther.

I have a life. I stated my opinion. I'm tired of getting into debates over 9/11 (something that happened 9 years ago btw... that I wasn't around to witness first hand.. because I wasn't allowed to watch TV) and when I do say something people always either ignore it or ask "the same questions over"

I have done all this research stuff. If its so important to you, look into it. For your information... my dad knows people in architecture. Do you want me to drag them onto Neowin and tell all of you why the buildings collapsed the wrong why or why they collapsed too soon?

Now if you don't mind. I have schoolwork to finish >.>

[hdood]

As for educating myself. Do research and come back and tell me I'm wrong. ANd please don't bring up the "pancake theory"

Why would anyone do that? The "official story" as you call it does not involve any "pancake theory." I explained in my last post what actually happened.

If you look at the blueprints for the twin towers there is no way the planes could have made them fall that quickly, if at all. The fire only effected a few floors, it's not going to send a building from the 70s to the ground in a few hours.

Actually, if you look at the design, it's perfectly understandable how it could happen. The problem is that you just think it "sounds fishy" without actually having looked at the science.

[Joe User]

The WTC was unique in that the only support the floors had were the inner core and the perimeter columns.

Excellent picture!

That picture pretty much tells the story if you know basic engineering. Those buildings were pretty darn amazing.

I still wish I never moved downtown though.

[Howling Wind]

It "could happen" but why so quickly and why a perfect free fall?

Also, those pictures of the plane in pennsylvania were taken by the government. Figures. How is there proof that those pictures were taken in Pennsylvania?

Also if I'm not covering everyone's points its because so many people are replying I'm getting a bit confused here. Like I said, I'm trying to do school work at the same time as all this bull I have already done in the past >.>

[PreKe]

I'm not a 9/11 truther. I never meant to start a debate and you are the kind of people that make me half scared to pull up evidence. Or do all the research again. If you've got a problem with me I suggest you get on with it and stop acting like a total jerk and calling me a truther.

So you admit that you have no evidence?

I have a life. I stated my opinion. I'm tired of getting into debates over 9/11 (something that happened 9 years ago btw... that I wasn't around to witness first hand.. because I wasn't allowed to watch TV) and when I do say something people always either ignore it or ask "the same questions over"

Of course people will ask the same questions again when you never respond to them.

I have done all this research stuff. If its so important to you, look into it. For your information... my dad knows people in architecture. Do you want me to drag them onto Neowin and tell all of you why the buildings collapsed the wrong why or why they collapsed too soon?

Again: Please explain exactly why a plane could not cause a building to collapse.

Now if you don't mind. I have schoolwork to finish >.>

Hit and run.

It "could happen" but why so quickly and why a perfect free fall?

It was not free fall, and it happened the way it did because of the weakened structure.

Also, those pictures of the plane in pennsylvania were taken by the government. Figures. How is there proof that those pictures were taken in Pennsylvania?

Right. So you reject any evidence automatically. Typical Truther tactic.

[Howling Wind]

I'm not a truther. You see? This is why I stay away from debates like this. All you people do is repeatedly call me something I tell you I'm not just to **** me off.

And its not a HIT AND RUN. Moron. I'm 13 years old, I have school. Okay? I will gladly go into more DETAIL when I'm not busy.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

well, you are very young Howling Wind. I was 10 when the space shuttle Challenger blew up. I wrote a paper for a class project on why it blew it up. It was fairly spot on even though my sources were a lot less than what we have now. Goes without saying that we didn't have the internet nor were the "conspiracy theories" running rapid.

I understand you are very busy...I do not miss the days of having homework every night. However, I would suggest that you, on your own time, carefully reexamine the events of 9/11. Don't close your mind into thinking it happened this way or that way. Eventually you will arrive at what really happened. (Y)

[hdood]

I have done all this research stuff. If its so important to you, look into it.

Well, I was an adult on 9/11, and you may think this is new to me, but it really isn't. I have "looked into it." Years and years ago. You're just rehashing the same old misconceptions.

For your information... my dad knows people in architecture.

"Architecture" is actually the wrong discipline here. I think you're looking for structural engineers, which have to be involved in these kinds of constructions.

It "could happen" but why so quickly and why a perfect free fall?

It wasn't quickly, it progressed at a perfectly reasonable rate from a scientific point of view. IT also wasn't a perfect free fall, although the lower part of the buildings didn't offer much resistance because they weren't designed to handle the load of the top crashing down.

Also, those pictures of the plane in pennsylvania were taken by the government. Figures. How is there proof that those pictures were taken in Pennsylvania?

That pretty much rules out any chance of any sort of discussion. You can't just claim that anything that discredits your theory is "made up."

All you people do is repeatedly call me something I tell you I'm not just to **** me off.

I think I've responded to your points in quite a reasonable way. I realize that you're being bombarded by several people, but just take your time.

[Howling Wind]

I'm just saying. Everyone says this and that about what happened in pennsylvania. If you and others are allowed to question why some don't think the buildings fell from a plane crash and asking for proof on this. How do you know those pictures are taken from pennsylvania? It's a fair question, isn't it?

Basically, I don't want a big debate about it right now. I was mainly just posting my opinion and somehow I think I got involved in a reply someone made to someone else.

If this thread stays open, I will gladly post more detailed stuff. I'm not trying to run from anything.. hit and run or whatever. All I need to do is find my keynote address for my school project about 9/11 and post it here.

Its about 15 minutes long.... and should answer everything you guys are asking.. I just don't have time to type it all out by hand and find links to this and that. Sorry.

[Joe User]

that I wasn't around to witness first hand..

I was. Albany street and West street, 12 flights up.

Ask your questions. Do you want to know what the first impact sounded like? How about the approach of the plane for the second. Ask me how the building shook. Do you want to know what the second impact was like? Or how the collapse looked and sounded.

Ask away.

For your information... my dad knows people in architecture. Do you want me to drag them onto Neowin and tell all of you why the buildings collapsed the wrong why or why they collapsed too soon?

Sure. My brother used to design large structures, it should be fun.

[hdood]

I'm just saying. Everyone says this and that about what happened in pennsylvania. If you and others are allowed to question why some don't think the buildings fell from a plane crash and asking for proof on this. How do you know those pictures are taken from pennsylvania? It's a fair question, isn't it?

Thousands of people were involved. The feds, regular people, the media, the airlines. Everyone seemed to be satisfied. Did you actually know that they recovered most of the plane? You might be too young to remember, but it was in the media. Don't you see that the problem with your theory is that so many people would have to be involved? People who would have nothing to gain from being part of it? Why on earth would the airlines want to be part of it?

The reality is that when you make extraordinary claims that go against conventional understanding, then the onus is on you. You have to provide solid evidence for your claims. That's how the world works.

[PreKe]

I'm 13 years old

...

[Howling Wind]

Okay. If my dad will let me I can get some stuff from him on it and maybe his buddies can either come on here or give me some info. And that keynote I mentioned has all kinds of stuff in it.

Also, what did the crash sound like? How did the buildings shake? Who knows, maybe what you know will change my whole opinion.

PrekE if you're going to be a jerk about it just forget it. I have better things to do with my time. >.> Honestly.

[Joe User]

I'm 13 years old, I have school. Okay? I will gladly go into more DETAIL when I'm not busy.

Sorry, I would have been less snarky if I knew you were a HS student.

I assumed you were in college.

[Howling Wind]

LOL.

It's okay. I'm just in a bad mood. And I hate people calling me a truther. The bottom line is... that my knowledge of sky scrappers the take forever to collapse. And somehow I found out that the plane or whatever debris was questionable.. But heck... I could be all wrong. I just remember when I brought up valid questions and what I thought happened on a forum before nobody cared to even look into what I was saying..

They would just scream "truther!" or you're wrong!

I'm not trying to avoid anyones points.. I think they are just getting lost in all the replies >.>

[s1k3sT]

I'll try to use logic, although I have a feeling you won't accept it, but since I'm waiting for an install to finish...

There is the stated story of what happened. It's out there. Google it. Virtually everyone agrees that this is what happened on that day. There are a few people out there that think that "official" story is a lie to cover something else up. That's the conspiracy referred to. It's a theory because it's an idea that is unproven. Therefore you suffer from believing in a conspiracy theory. Now, you will twist words for no other reason than obfuscation. See, words are invented to mean things. When an idea is widely referred to by a word or phrase, it takes on that meaning. You're like a guy that would throw a spastic fit if I asked you to grab my Coke from the counter when IT WAS ACTUALLY A PEPSI!!! I meant my drink on the counter, you know I meant my drink on the counter yet you still choose to create confusion where there should be none. You believe in a conspiracy theory. The rest of us believe in the facts of a terrorist conspiracy that was followed through and became a terrorist act.

The two separate words conspiracy and theory have a totally different meaning than the term conspiracy theory, so you example of coke and pepsi isn't valid. It's like comparing pepsi to motor oil, although some would agree :laugh: , we all know they aren't even close to the same. The two words separately define an average person, and pretty much the whole population, whereas the new 1984 meaning is almost the exact opposite, it only encompasses a very small segment of the population.

BTW, a really great source of information on 9/11 is right here. It's peer reviewed scientific evidence that proves the official conspiracy theory is bull****.

[hdood]

Okay. If my dad will let me I can get some stuff from him on it and maybe his buddies can either come on here

Honestly, there's not much point in doing it if they'll presumably just be rehashing the same old stuff all the other conspiracy theorists do. Since they should know better (even if they aren't engineers), you should post their license numbers so we can put them on the "architects to avoid" list.

You may think that there's lots of stuff we don't know here or haven't heard before, but there really isn't. Heard it all before.

The bottom line is... that my knowledge of sky scrappers the take forever to collapse.

Can you name five other skyscrapers with the same design as the WTC? Three? One? Bet you can't. Also, it actually did take "forever." The weakening of the floors was a process that took from the time the planes hit until the buildings collapsed. That was quite a long time, don't you think? If you mean the actual collapse, what do you think should have happened when the floors weakened to the point where they pulled the outer walls in far enough that the construction collapsed and came tumbling down? At that point nothing is supporting it. There's nothing to hold it back. Nothing to make it take "forever." It will fall straight down.

[dead.cell]

Didn't she have homework to get to? lol...

[Joe User]

Okay. If my dad will let me I can get some stuff from him on it and maybe his buddies can either come on here or give me some info. And that keynote I mentioned has all kinds of stuff in it.

Also, what did the crash sound like? How did the buildings shake? Who knows, maybe what you know will change my whole opinion.

PrekE if you're going to be a jerk about it just forget it. I have better things to do with my time. >.> Honestly.

Fair enough. The first impact sounded like a large truck crash at high speed. I thought it came from the tunnel at first. I was exercising by the window and I remember all the birds flying away at once. I didn't have a view of the towers for the first impact.

The approach of the second plane was very loud, as it pretty much passed over my apartment. The second impact was much louder, set off car alarms and broke windows, and the resulting shock-wave from it caused the building to shudder. Debris from the second impact were visible on West street.

During evacuation, you could see the damage to the structure of the building.

The collapse sounded like a tornado. People were running everywhere and there was massive damage to all surrounding buildings, you could hear glass breaking over a lot of it. Lots of sirens as well. The dust cloud enveloped most of battery park city and fortunately, I was already outside of most of it.

[Howling Wind]

Uh, I'm a female for like the third time since I signed up here. Also I have been doing homework for the last 10 minutes since my last reply in this thread.

Nice reply person, really.

Edit.

Thanks joe for the reply.

[s1k3sT]

I'm not a truther. You see? This is why I stay away from debates like this. All you people do is repeatedly call me something I tell you I'm not just to **** me off.

I got a solution, it may seem simple or stupid but it works: be proud of being a truther! What's the opposite? A liar?

[hdood]

The two separate words conspiracy and theory have a totally different meaning than the term conspiracy theory, so you example of coke and pepsi isn't valid.

Conspiracy theory is a term that refers to people that believe in "creative" alternative explanations for things. That is its established meaning. Accept it and get over it.

BTW, a really great source of information on 9/11 is right here. It's peer reviewed scientific evidence that proves the official conspiracy theory is bull****.

Where's the peer-reviewed paper from an engineering journal? Oh, it doesn't exist. "The Environmentalist?" Oookay.

Hey, since you've read it, where does it say all the passengers, crew and planes went?