• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

'controlled demolition of WTC'

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mrklaw

MrArseFace
link to paranoid video


V.long clip, and probably bullshit. Says explosives were used to bring the towers down.

Stuff like the 'explosions' towards the end could easily have been debris from inside the tower.

Still, I guess conspiracy theories are comforting to some..
 
I couldn't get past the banner on the top.

220603topbanner.gif
 
putting all other idiot ideas aside, let’s take this logically for just a moment. with the amount of explosives to bring down both towers, it would take a very long time to arrange. that takes time and resources. second, the manpower to put the equipment in place would be difficult, due to getting the bodies, putting the explosives in place and not getting caught. third, remote detonation of these devices would've easily been identified by 26 Federal Plaza, just a few blocks away. fourth, back to the manpower issue, people like to talk. ever heard of "loose lips sink ships?" the notion that ALL of the people involved in this event would never spill the beans/brag/tip someone off... impossible.

again.

1. planning
2. manpower
3. material
4. likelihood that nobody would talk

=

impossible.
 
mrklaw said:
link to paranoid video


V.long clip, and probably bullshit. Says explosives were used to bring the towers down.

Stuff like the 'explosions' towards the end could easily have been debris from inside the tower.

Still, I guess conspiracy theories are comforting to some..
Click to expand...

Probably bullshit? You're kidding me right?
 
mrklaw said:
link to paranoid video


V.long clip, and probably bullshit. Says explosives were used to bring the towers down.

Stuff like the 'explosions' towards the end could easily have been debris from inside the tower.

Still, I guess conspiracy theories are comforting to some..
Click to expand...

It's all true! Xenu himself told me after I freed myself from the evil body thetans poisoning my mind! AGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
 
Nerevar said:
It's all true! Xenu himself told me after I freed myself from the evil body thetans poisoning my mind! AGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Click to expand...

Stop drinking the koolaid man. Xenu's nothing but a pawn, a piece in a game of chess being played by the Illuminati.
 
That narrator is horrible... absolutely horrible. I'm not going to beleive this until they get a professional narrator.
 
ManDudeChild said:
Stop drinking the koolaid man. Xenu's nothing but a pawn, a piece in a game of chess being played by the Illuminati.
Click to expand...


The Illuminati only think they're controlling the show. Little do they know they're actually aliens that Xenu deposited around a volcano many millions of years ago. The fools! When and if Xenu gets out of prison they'll be hell to pay!
 
Manics said:
The Illuminati only think they're controlling the show. Little do they know they're actually aliens that Xenu deposited around a volcano many millions of years ago. The fools! When and if Xenu gets out of prison they'll be hell to pay!
Click to expand...

Once again ignorance raises it's ugly head. The Illuminati knows this fact already. The fact of the matter is, they're plannning a coup d'état of Xenu's empire by using their fleet of modded De Lorean sports car equipped with flux capacitators. Upon going back 75 billion years, they'll use a hidden DC-8 space plane to infiltrate Xenu's galactic empire. Get with the program man.
 
Search Marvin Bush in google.... hmm.. did some research now I'm scared. BUSH FAMILY IS EVIL. THEY RIGGED THE ELECTION, THEY PROFITED FROM INSIDER TRADING, THEY ORCHESTRATED 9/11.
 
It's difficult to discount this completely, and not just because the arguement made is well thought out.

I have difficulty discounting it because I know of other countries in the world where the government have said one thing, but an entirely different series of events occurred. Usually, the reasons for the cover up was to:

a) hate (e.g. destroy a minority religon)
b) power grab by the "elite"
c) fool the public into changing their opinion and agree to drastic measures of some kind

So, since history repeats itself, I would hardly be surprised that a sinister plan was in place in the WTC's destruction. Proving that it did happen will of course be difficult, if not impossible.
 
Hitman said:
Search Marvin Bush in google.... hmm.. did some research now I'm scared. BUSH FAMILY IS EVIL.
Click to expand...

It gets worse. What Bush really wants is well... BEHOLD what happens when you re-arrange the letters in the bolded part above.

I am evils, buy fish!l11

This is indeed a dark world. Soon we'll all be eating that stuff and why you might ask?

...
they want to poison us with mercury ... then extract the OIL that we injested with the fish. Energy problem solved and population down.
 
M3Freak said:
It's difficult to discount this completely, and not just because the arguement made is well thought out.

I have difficulty discounting it because I know of other countries in the world where the government have said one thing, but an entirely different series of events occurred. Usually, the reasons for the cover up was to:

a) hate (e.g. destroy a minority religon)
b) power grab by the "elite"
c) fool the public into changing their opinion and agree to drastic measures of some kind

So, since history repeats itself, I would hardly be surprised that a sinister plan was in place in the WTC's destruction. Proving that it did happen will of course be difficult, if not impossible.
Click to expand...

So, it's difficult to discount because "history repeats itself"? Yeah, that's solid grounds for doubt right there. :rolleyes


edit: just finished watching the video. Man, that narrator sounds like an insufferable, self-absorbed dork, who I'm sure I'd have the overwhelming urge to slap in the face if I ever met him.
 
"AMERICA IS NEVER WRONG! STOP OFFENDING LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY BY SPEAKING AGAINST AMERICA! YOU ARE UNAMERICAN PEICE OF SHIT!"
 
Can I ask though, how does the the voice of a narrator make something less plausible? I'm not going to say anything either way, but does everyone honestly believe everything in the official story about the events that happened?
 
mrklaw said:
Says explosives were used to bring the towers down.
Click to expand...
I wonder if these guys have ever seen a building wired to come down. It involves literally miles of detonation wire strung like a spider's web throughout the building.

M3Freak said:
Proving that it did happen will of course be difficult, if not impossible.
Click to expand...
That's what so annoying about conspiracy theorists. They take failure as proof that they are getting closer to the "truth."
 
ImNotLikeThem said:
Can I ask though, how does the the voice of a narrator make something less plausible? I'm not going to say anything either way, but does everyone honestly believe everything in the official story about the events that happened?
Click to expand...

Obviously there's shit we're not told. I mean we still don't know 100% if or if not anything was shot down on 9/11 (and that slip up Rumsfeld made makes for a legit question), but common man. A bit of common sense and knowledge shows that there wasn't a massive conspiracy. I'm not saying I think the U.S. government is above something so low, no, I'm simply saying that ... well grab a brain man.
 
I have proof that GW himself pushed the detonate button... PROOF I TELL YA!!!!!!
 
ImNotLikeThem said:
Can I ask though, how does the the voice of a narrator make something less plausible?
Click to expand...
Because it's just some delusional choad with too much time on his hands making some dumbass paranoid video?

What part of the "official story" are you skeptical about?

[On preview: the shooting down of the PA flight, I always thought that could be a possibility too, but I think Occam's razor applies; there's no reason to go through such an elaborate hoax IMO)
 
ImNotLikeThem said:
Can I ask though, how does the the voice of a narrator make something less plausible? I'm not going to say anything either way, but does everyone honestly believe everything in the official story about the events that happened?
Click to expand...

The whiny stupid voice of the narrative just adds annoyance to a completely implausible conspiracy theory.
 
LakeEarth said:
Those people who run that site must've never watched a Discovery Channel program on destroying buildings.
Click to expand...


exactly. of course you are going hear loud booms and explosions when a huge skyscraper is crumbling down.

my only question is.. what would be the point of hiding this information.. it really wouldnt have changed much.

nm. just saw the end of video.. blahhh.
 
Wouldnt it make sense that all the floors collapse one after the other?? its like a fat chick sitting on your head... first your head is gonna cave in then neck.. shoulders ect ect..
 
I still find it odd the way the building came down. The top part should have tipped over, considering it was "chopped" like a tree is chopped to take it down.



/tinfoil hat off.
 
muncheese said:
I still find it odd the way the building came down. The top part should have tipped over, considering it was "chopped" like a tree is chopped to take it down.



/tinfoil hat off.
Click to expand...


Nah. The external skin of the WTCs are very strong, so it basically caved in. The hole made by the planes wouldn't have been that big in comparison.
 
mrklaw said:
Nah. The external skin of the WTCs are very strong, so it basically caved in. The hole made by the planes wouldn't have been that big in comparison.
Click to expand...

yeah, remember it was the fire from all the jet fuel that brought the buildings down, not the actual collision itself. The fire melted the steel supports, which caused it to internally collapse.
 
my stepdad is so knee deep into this shit its fucking annoying




he thought the world was gonna end in 1994 (nice thing to tell your stepson when he was 13)

he also thinks 9 11 was all orchestrated and osama is actually working for us and.... ugh... you get the idea
 
APF said:
What part of the "official story" are you skeptical about?

[On preview: the shooting down of the PA flight, I always thought that could be a possibility too, but I think Occam's razor applies; there's no reason to go through such an elaborate hoax IMO)
Click to expand...
Besides the PA plane? For one:
Nerevar said:
yeah, remember it was the fire from all the jet fuel that brought the buildings down, not the actual collision itself. The fire melted the steel supports, which caused it to internally collapse.
Click to expand...
That. The burning point of jetfuel != melting point of steel. Given how long the planes had also been in flight at that point, they didn't have a full tank, and especially the second tower, where most of the explosion you can SEE was blown outside of corner of the building, I don't buy the fact that both buildings, built to withstand an impact that great, just happened to fall perfectly downwards into a relatively neat pile at the bottom, and both minutes apart, all because burning jet fuel weakened the fireproofed and incredible durable support beams in exactly the same way.
 
ImNotLikeThem said:
Besides the PA plane? For one:

That. The burning point of jetfuel != melting point of steel. Given how long the planes had also been in flight at that point, they didn't have a full tank, and especially the second tower, where most of the explosion you can SEE was blown outside of corner of the building, I don't buy the fact that both buildings, built to withstand an impact that great, just happened to fall perfectly downwards into a relatively neat pile at the bottom, and both minutes apart, all because burning jet fuel weakened the fireproofed and incredible durable support beams in exactly the same way.
Click to expand...


I'm glad your extensive knowledge and background of structural engineering, as well as your thorough study of the actual makeup of the two towers and the rubble itself has led you to this conclusion.

Or, like the video linked to, did you derive it because you "heard loud explosions as it collapsed"?

Sorry, all this comes down to people who want to believe some vast conspiracy. It's no different than creationists arguing against evolution - any small uncertainty is incontrovertible proof that evolution is wrong and creationism is right. Believe whatever asinine explanation you want, but the fact that numerous experts (who don't even work for the government) have come to the same conclusion (this ignores the whole issue of how impossible it would be for a conspiracy that size to be kept secret, but whatever) makes for a very compelling argument which I have yet to see contradicted.
 
ImNotLikeThem said:
Besides the PA plane? For one:

That. The burning point of jetfuel != melting point of steel. Given how long the planes had also been in flight at that point, they didn't have a full tank,
Click to expand...

Umm, as I recall, all the planes took off from the east coast, and were scheduled to fly to the west coast, so yes, they'd have pretty full tanks :P

and especially the second tower, where most of the explosion you can SEE was blown outside of corner of the building, I don't buy the fact that both buildings, built to withstand an impact that great, just happened to fall perfectly downwards into a relatively neat pile at the bottom, and both minutes apart, all because burning jet fuel weakened the fireproofed and incredible durable support beams in exactly the same way.
Click to expand...

Umm, you don't buy it, but don't have any real reason to doubt it. People give you a reason, and you just decide to question it.

In my opinion, the only people who can question the "burning jetfuel weakened the support beams" theory are those who are actually qualified and knowledgeable on the forces at work within the fire in the WTC.

And somehow, I doubt you are qualified, since all I see from your doubts is "I don't buy it". Hardly a sound argument :P

edit: what Nerevar said.
 
mrklaw said:
Nah. The external skin of the WTCs are very strong, so it basically caved in. The hole made by the planes wouldn't have been that big in comparison.
Click to expand...


yeah, the inside crumbled first, which caused the outside to crumble at a slightly delayed rate.. thats why you see little 'explosions' several meters below the crumbling of the exterior. it was basically collapsing inward and down.
 
This thread is idiotic and I don't know how anyone can believe that shit.

Maybe there was something funny about the Pentagon or PA (which I highly doubt), but how anyone can make up something this insane is beyond me.

I mean if someone said Tom Brady was behind everything, ok maybe I believe that. That is somewhat credible because that fucker is pure evil. But to say the Towers weren't hit by airplanes is beyond me. This is one of the things I hate about the internet, it has given idiots a much larger voice than they should have. Oh well, I guess that is what you pay for freedom of speech.
 
APF said:
It didn't need to melt, just lose structural integrity.
Click to expand...
Concrete reinforced steel encased in fireproofing material will not lose structural integrity. Espcially considering the fact that the fires were only centered around a corner of the building, that doesn't explain why the entire building fell evenly, and perfectly straight all the way down.

The claimed 800C fires in the WTC took down two entire skyscrapers in just over an hour, yet a fire raging nonstop for 20 hours was not enough to collapse a 32 storey bulding completely engulfed in flames in Spain this past february, using inferior materials than the wtc no less? I'm sorry, I don't believe it.
 
bionic77 said:
But to say the Towers weren't hit by airplanes is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Besides the fact that I'm not going to argue and make a big deal out of this, since this is my opinion and I dont want to force things on people the same way i wouldn't want people to do to me..... where the hell did you get that from? Thats the first I've EVER heard that. Thats not disputable, given the fact that people saw it happen. Nowhere has anyone said anything like that.

Anyway, I don't claim to be an expert at shit, but I have done research on things, and not just from "some random shitty website" or whatever. I'm not satisfied with what I was told, so I made an effort to try to research some things, nothing more.
 
ImNotLikeThem said:
The claimed 800C fires in the WTC took down two entire skyscrapers in just over an hour, yet a fire raging nonstop for 20 hours was not enough to collapse a 32 storey bulding completely engulfed in flames in Spain this past february, using inferior materials than the wtc no less? I'm sorry, I don't believe it.
Click to expand...

Jet fuel burns more intensely and hotter than building materials, and I doubt there was any form of accelerant involved in your Spain fire. If you think anything other than those two planes took down the WTC towers, you're full of shit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Amazon is officially gaining creative control of the James Bond franchise
2 3 4
199
14K
Nocty replied
  • Locked
Ukraine is fielding machine-gun turrets remotely controlled by the Steam Deck
33
2K
Puscifer replied
US will control TikTok’s algorithm under deal, White House says
News 
20
626
MayauMiao replied
Chat Control, the EUs super bill to monitor the web
2 3
142
3K
IDKFA replied
WSJ: Elon Musk-Led Group Makes $97.4 Billion Bid for Control of OpenAI
43
4K
EverydayBeast replied
Top Bottom