first scientific investigation of the collapse wtc 7

[armati]

9/11 & The Road To America's Orwellian Hell
by Tyler Durden
Fri, 09/06/2019 - 23:15
Authored by James Bovard via The Future of Freedom Foundation

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-09- ... llian-hell

[jimboston]

I know you’re not going to believe anything I say, because it’s nearly impossible to argue with a person once they’ve gotten their teeth into a conspiracy theory... and anything I say will be dismissed as wrong... but let’s try one time...

a building was reported collapsed prior to the collapse but what the heck.
2 vidoes of tv stations doing exactly that

So I don’t believe this happened... if you have some video evidence I’ll watch.
(Though I won’t watch 50minutes of BS just to get to these videos.. so just link these directly.)

Here’s the thing... aside from me seeing it live on my own TV...

If I was the gov’t planning this I WOULD NOT EVER TELL A TV STATION WHAT WAS GONNA HAPPEN IN ADVANCE.
That’s like rule 101 of Conspiracy Theories.

I think the gov’t does a lot of things poorly.... but I don’t think they would bungle this fundamental rule!

It’s easier for me to believe the government would commit the 911 Conspiracy, than it is for me to believe that they ld be so bad at it that they would inform people in the news media that the building was going to collapse prior. to it collapsing!

Anyway, you ask who benefits or how did they benefit from 911?

The 911 towers were used as an excuse to invade Iraq, recall weapons of mass destruction?
That was a conspiracy perpetrated by the gov.
Except when the gov does it, its simply called a lie.

911 was not a good excuse to Invade Iraq. It was initially a reason to invade Afghanistan, a place nobody really cared about.

Only later was Bin Laden associated with Iraq, and then 911 was added to the list of reasons to invade Iraq.

two quick points here....
- Bush was gonna find a way to invade Iraq one way or the other... I’ll concede that.
It was high on his “to do” list when he became President... he was mad Saddam was still around and thumbing his nose at the US, and he was mad that Saddam had apparently tried to have Bush Sr. assassinated at some point. Bush didn’t NEED 911 to get into a war with Iraq.

- If the whole 911 was a conspiracy... why didn’t they plant evidence that implicated Iraq directly? Why implicate Bin Ladin and Afghanistan. It makes no logical sense.

War, is the most profitable business known, there were/are many that benefit.

The american people themselves benefit big times with jobs alone.
Obviously the executives benefit bigger and the lobby groups get funded big time too.

Smedly Butler, the highest decorated marine general up to his retirement wrote a book, War is a Racket.
He explains clearly, its all about the money.

These acts are known as "false flags" they are done to start wars,

Not in dispute... I agree with these points.
I just think if the gov’t wants to start a war and plant false flags they’re gonna do a better job than 911

the bay of Tonkin incident is an excellent example.
That one cost over 3 million lives. 58 thousand were american lives.

Don’t know enough about it to comment... and it’s a separate theory, so I don’t wanna get side tracked

How can it be hoped to be kept secret? Secrets can be kept.

Secrets can be kept... but not when you provide details to TV stations in advance.

Can you tell me for sure who murdered JFK?

Yes. Lee Harvey Oswald.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Harvey_Oswald

The "conspiracy" does not fall short of any mark, it has done exactly as was intended.
This includes your loss of privacy, everything you do on a computer,cell phone,financial transaction....all recorded.
It actually takes an effort now to achieve privacy.

This is a great example of fake conspiracy theories.

You’re using revisionist history to confirm your pre-existing bias.

Did they instigate 911 to start a war with Iraq, or did they do it to take away my privacy?

You start off with the war theory... then you start blaming the conspiracy for a bunch of other bad things that have happened.

We started losing our privacy long before 911. People like to bitch about the loss of privacy, and I’m one of them.
That said, historically speaking, in many ways we have way more privacy now than we did in the 1700’s.

steel can begin to melt, its solidus, is 1,130 °C (2,070 °F). Steel never turns into a liquid below this temperature. Pure Iron ('Steel' with 0% Carbon) starts to melt at 1,492 °C (2,718 °F),
The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1,000°C—hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1,500°C.

For further info, altho it contradicts your thinking, https://www.ae911truth.org/
More than 3000 architects and engineers are more than happy to explain it all to you.

3000 fully trained people that kinda know what their talkin about is a pretty big conspiracy theory.

It’s not a structural engineer and I doubt you are either.

That said, I did study some engineering in college, and I know enough to understand that you don’t have to melt steel to reduce it’s structural integrity... heating it up is enough to weaken it to the point of failure way before it hits the melting point. Furthermore, failure involves not just heat but also pressure. The melting point of a substance changes with pressure... a substance under pressure will melt at a lower temperature. The temperatures provided are likely the melting point at 1g under no additional pressure... the beams in the building are under constant pressure so you have. to factor that into any calculations you provide.

(I find it interesting that people believe tv or what their told to believe over their own eyes) (Just human I guess).

What am I believing that my eyes didn’t tell me?

I saw two giant plans slam into a building, and then I saw the building fall.

My eyes told me that those planes knocked down the building.

If you believe that the planes were just a distraction and there were explosives previously buried at the base of the building... you are the one who is believing what you’re told and not what you see.

Hope I answered a couple of ur questions.

I’ve heard these theories before. I’ve tried watching a few of these movies on the subject... I think Zeitgeist the Movie was one... I couldn’t get through it.

I was digging Part 1... where he kinda bashes Christianity... but when he got into the 911stuff he just starts throwing everything and the kitchen sink at the Conspiracy.

That’s one of the obvious failures of bad conspiracy theories... when they can’t agree on the facts or have conflicting facts... but just heap more and more data at the idea.

[Dukasaur]

steel can begin to melt, its solidus, is 1,130 °C (2,070 °F). Steel never turns into a liquid below this temperature. Pure Iron ('Steel' with 0% Carbon) starts to melt at 1,492 °C (2,718 °F),
The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1,000°C—hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1,500°C.

This is one of the most basic things that have been explained to the tinfoil hatters a thousand times and they never stop coming back to it.

Yes, steel melts at 2700, but it starts to weaken and deform long before that.

You don't need to melt a steel column to cause it to buckle. A few hundred degrees is enough to weaken it -- if it's close to its stress load that can make it buckle.

I know of at least three examples of bridges coming down because of a diesel tanker catching fire:
Here on the 401 in 1987.
Oakland in the 00s (2004? 2007? sometime around there.)
Atlanta in 2014.

Hell, anybody who's had a steel shed knows that sometimes even on a hot summer day the walls will buckle out. There's not much weight on them, so they don't fall down, but if they were carrying significant weight they'd be at risk.

A thousand debunkers have pointed this out, but the tinfoil hatters keep coming back to it.

[NomadPatriot]

steel can begin to melt, its solidus, is 1,130 °C (2,070 °F). Steel never turns into a liquid below this temperature. Pure Iron ('Steel' with 0% Carbon) starts to melt at 1,492 °C (2,718 °F),
The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1,000°C—hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1,500°C.

This is one of the most basic things that have been explained to the tinfoil hatters a thousand times and they never stop coming back to it.

Yes, steel melts at 2700, but it starts to weaken and deform long before that.

You don't need to melt a steel column to cause it to buckle. A few hundred degrees is enough to weaken it -- if it's close to its stress load that can make it buckle.

I know of at least three examples of bridges coming down because of a diesel tanker catching fire:
Here on the 401 in 1987.
Oakland in the 00s (2004? 2007? sometime around there.)
Atlanta in 2014.

Hell, anybody who's had a steel shed knows that sometimes even on a hot summer day the walls will buckle out. There's not much weight on them, so they don't fall down, but if they were carrying significant weight they'd be at risk.

A thousand debunkers have pointed this out, but the tinfoil hatters keep coming back to it.

so the numerous television interviews of fire fighters talking about puddles of molten steel they found under the rubble during rescue operations were wrong..?

I think there is even a video showing the molten steel...

[jimboston]

steel can begin to melt, its solidus, is 1,130 °C (2,070 °F). Steel never turns into a liquid below this temperature. Pure Iron ('Steel' with 0% Carbon) starts to melt at 1,492 °C (2,718 °F),
The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1,000°C—hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1,500°C.

This is one of the most basic things that have been explained to the tinfoil hatters a thousand times and they never stop coming back to it.

Yes, steel melts at 2700, but it starts to weaken and deform long before that.

You don't need to melt a steel column to cause it to buckle. A few hundred degrees is enough to weaken it -- if it's close to its stress load that can make it buckle.

I know of at least three examples of bridges coming down because of a diesel tanker catching fire:
Here on the 401 in 1987.
Oakland in the 00s (2004? 2007? sometime around there.)
Atlanta in 2014.

Hell, anybody who's had a steel shed knows that sometimes even on a hot summer day the walls will buckle out. There's not much weight on them, so they don't fall down, but if they were carrying significant weight they'd be at risk.

A thousand debunkers have pointed this out, but the tinfoil hatters keep coming back to it.

so the numerous television interviews of fire fighters talking about puddles of molten steel they found under the rubble during rescue operations were wrong..?

I think there is even a video showing the molten steel...

Melting point is a function of temperature AND pressure.

Learn basic physics.

[armati]

"So I don’t believe this happened... if you have some video evidence I’ll watch".

I provided these two.
They are more than a few seconds tho.

BBC reports WTC 7 collapsed...BEFORE it collapsed! NEW
https://youtu.be/f0HPqd8dPeE

Fox reports WTC 7 collapse before it happens
https://youtu.be/_EWKtO_xXsk

Kinda shows ur really not going to look at the evidence provided by the A&Engineers, that takes more than a few minutes to read.

"What am I believing that my eyes didn’t tell me?"

It is controlled demolition, you only need to watch a few vids of other controlled demolitions to see the towers were controlled.
Ur believing they are not controlled.



Many first responders report explosives for example.

the argument steel doesnt need to burn only weaken, great argument, over 3000 archetects and engineers have dif opinions.
Why would thermite be used if that were the case?

Not really sure the blogoshpere could be considered the best source for info .
I understand a bridge can come down due to a diesel fire, these buildings were built to withstand aircraft hitting them.

The archetects and engineers can explain much better than I can, obviously, odd that so many A&Es agree, why would they do what theyre doing?, their reputations are on the line.

https://www.ae911truth.org

I got a good giggle from ur Lee Harvy Oswald reply.
Honestly, ya gotta wonder how many people still believe that.



"......and anything I say will be dismissed as wrong.." and thats exactly what I have found.

9/11 & The Road To America's Orwellian Hell
by Tyler Durden
Fri, 09/06/2019 - 23:15
Authored by James Bovard via The Future of Freedom Foundation

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-09- ... llian-hell

I posted this showing some of the results from 911, its a bit of a read too tho.


12 crazy conspiracy theories that actually turned out to be true

://www.readersdigest.com.au/true-stories-lifestyle/12-crazy-conspiracy-theories-actually-turned-out-be-true?slide=4

There are lots of these if ya wanna look, remember that anyone talking of these things was a conspiracy kook at the time.
Turns out they simply thought for themselves.

[jimboston]

I’m gonna take these one at a time in no particular order...

12 crazy conspiracy theories that actually turned out to be true

://www.readersdigest.com.au/true-stories-lifestyle/12-crazy-conspiracy-theories-actually-turned-out-be-true?slide=4

There are lots of these if ya wanna look, remember that anyone talking of these things was a conspiracy kook at the time.
Turns out they simply thought for themselves.

First the link you posted is cut... but I was able find the article?

Most of the “conspiracy theories” on this list aren’t really conspiracy theories and never where.
The few that might have been considered such aren’t on the level of 911, JFK, Moon Landing, Aliens, etc.

The one that is on that level... the Illuminati... wasn’t even close to being “proven”

The article is typical BS clickbait.

[jimboston]

I got a good giggle from ur Lee Harvy Oswald reply.
Honestly, ya gotta wonder how many people still believe that.

So I’m assuming you think the JFK Assassination was a Conspiracy.
If I’m wrong in this assumption I apologize.

Listen, I could get behind a conspiracy... and I kinda ‘want’ to get behind one.

My biggest problem with this conspiracy is none of the people who believe it was a conspiracy agree on the “who is behind it” question.

It’s the classic example of them throwing every possible idea or conjecture at the wall and hoping something sticks.

I mean... was it the Mob, the Russians, or the CIA / Military Industrial Complex (MIC)?

Maybe some combination of these three?

... and they wanted to recruit Lee Harvey Oswald and scapegoat him?

.... and how many other people needed to be involved in the cover up?
How many are to this day holding back the evidence that will solve the problem forever?

ugh.

[jonesthecurl]

re: dead babies - didn't know this, not vastly surprised given that they had live soldiers deliberately exposed to atom bomb tests.
re: poison booze - this is supposed to be a secret?
re: Mrs Wilson - not exactly a conspiracy theory.
re: testing LSD - read Ken Kesey. No secret. Never was.
re: Dalai lama - if true, it was a covert payment but I don't see that it's a conspiracy
re: John Lennon: I knew that, again it was no secret. He said on TV that he knew he couldn't leave the country because he wouldn't be let back in.
re: government spying: yes they do, and the fact that this article can quote figures from 2016 rather blows the idea that it's a secret government conspiracy.
re: naval incident: OK, though the provocation may not have been pre-approved. Certainly it seems to have been hushed up.
re: Cigarettes: Yes, and as I understand it more evidence is still coming to light (pun unintentional). Marketing by Big Tobacco continues, now we are beginning to see that vaping is a dangerous habit too.
re: aliens: ha ha very amusing
re: gaydar - interesting, but if they used this on large numbers of employees and fired (or didn't hire) hundreds, it's neither a conspiracy nor a secret.
re: Illuminati - ho-hum.

[armati]

ok, Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK.
Magic bullets exist and the gov had no problem telling the public they were experimenting with lsd etc.

I actually didnt read the conspiracy theories that turned out to be true article, there are many.

Obviously ur gonna believe as you want, thats ok.
I gotta tell ya tho, I really got a kick outta the Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK, I honustly didnt think anyone actually believed that anymore.

If ur interested, which ur not, as you said not gonna believe anything..................https://www.ae911truth.org
I dont blame you, why believe educated people? Especially people that have researched in depth, maybe they are trying to overthrow the gov?
Theres a conspiracy for ya.

Anyway, peace cousin.

[jonesthecurl]

Actually, it was a book about Kesey that I read about the tests in - my goof. It's Tom Wolfe's "Electric cool-aid acid test" which I see was published in 1968. LSD was criminalised the year before.

[Dukasaur]

I got a good giggle from ur Lee Harvy Oswald reply.
Honestly, ya gotta wonder how many people still believe that.

So I’m assuming you think the JFK Assassination was a Conspiracy.
If I’m wrong in this assumption I apologize.

Listen, I could get behind a conspiracy... and I kinda ‘want’ to get behind one.

My biggest problem with this conspiracy is none of the people who believe it was a conspiracy agree on the “who is behind it” question.

It’s the classic example of them throwing every possible idea or conjecture at the wall and hoping something sticks.

I mean... was it the Mob, the Russians, or the CIA / Military Industrial Complex (MIC)?

It was unquestionably the mob. A team of professional hitmen acting on the orders of Carlos Marcello, to be exact.

Marcello had a personal and very direct vendetta against the Kennedys, and in his worldview when you have a vendetta, you act on it.

I know a lot of nonsense has been floated about it being the CIA, the Russians, the Cubans, the "shadow government", disgruntled fired Secret Servicemen, etc. None of those theories holds water. The mob theory does. I'm not going to go typing a whole lot of stuff. There's literally hundreds of books on the Kennedy assassination available at your local library. Just read a few. You'll soon be struck by the fact that the ones supporting theories about the Cubans or the shadow government and so on are filled with a whole lot of chimeras and grumpkins. The books supporting the Mafia theory are based on good evidence and solid logic.

[NomadPatriot]

geez'o's..
EVERYONE knows Bigfoot shot JFK..

[Dukasaur]

No way do I believe a guy living as a sheep herder can take a few cessna lessons then drive an airliner doing the maneuvers they pulled off.

They actually weren't guys living as sheep herders. That's just you being a racist and assuming they have to herd sheep because they're Arabs. In actual fact, all four of the pilots (and the majority of the other terrorists) were recruited from middle-class or upper-class families in various Arab countries. In other words, they lived the high-tech life and if they herded anything it was probably Mercedes-Benzes.

All four of the pilots attended university (although only one of the four actually completed his degree, the others dropping out to join jihadi cells). One of them actually studied Aeronautical Engineering. All of them spent two years or more in training for their mission, including professional flying lessons in the U.S. Two of them completed several hundred hours in a Boeing 727 simulator, the same one that actual professional pilots are trained on. The other two had less training but enough to qualify. Three of the four had passed their exams and had a valid commercial pilots license from the FAA at the time of the attack.

[armati]

In other words, you agree with me, they were not sheep herders that took cessna lessons.

Does that make you racist?

[jimboston]

I actually didnt read the conspiracy theories that turned out to be true article, there are many.

So. You posted an article suggesting we read it because it will “show us there are many past conspiracies that were proven true”...

But...
- You never read the article yourself.
- The article has a bunch of interesting facts, most of which wouldn’t qualify as conspiracies or secrets.
- You probably still haven’t read the article.
- The article is your standard “click bait” type of article where you have to ‘click next’ to get to the supposed conspiracy.

... and then, even though this is all true... you still assert “there are many” past conspiracies that were proven true.

After all that, we’re supposed to consider you statements valid and trust the links you post.

Ooooookkkkaaaaaaayyyyyy.

[jimboston]

It was unquestionably the mob. A team of professional hitmen acting on the orders of Carlos Marcello, to be exact.

Marcello had a personal and very direct vendetta against the Kennedys, and in his worldview when you have a vendetta, you act on it.

So this is something I can sink my teeth into.

I like mob books and ‘true crime’ books, so if there’s something like that linking Marcello to JFK it could be interesting.
I’m not saying I’ll believe it, but it’s compact enough to be plausible.

I’ve not read any books about JFK assassination, but I’ve watched several movies including Oliver Stone’s JFK. They all follow they “throw everything at the wall and see what sticks model”... right away that turns me off and is generally an indication of how weak the underlying argument and proof is. Also those big conspiracies generally involve WAY TOO MANY PEOPLE for me to believe they’d remain secret... and also it’s hard for me to believe people perpetrating the act would want to risk having so many people.

A mob hit can be small enough and involve just enough people to believe it might work... while keeping it small enough to believe it could remain relatively quiet. Though it’d be interesting to see how Lee Harvey Oswald is involved in the mob hit... was he set up as a dope/distraction?

The funniest thing I think it the ‘magic bullet’ that people keep bringing up as proof of a cover-up. The ‘magic bullet’ conspires been debunked thoroughly. Enough!

[jimboston]

Just bought...
“The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination” by Lamar Waldron

There were 3 main books I found quickly about the subject.
They all had 4 stars plus, but this had the best reviews slightly.

So we’ll see what we see.

[armati]

Richard Gage Talks About 18 Years Of Deception!

https://youtu.be/TO3t3sr3vPo

911 blg 7