OllyK

Actually the steel didn't melt, jet fuel (kerosene) burns at about 600C, steel melts at over 1000C, 1200C IIRC, however, 600C combined with the impact was more than enough to weaken it to the point of catastrophic failure. The pools of molten metal referred to by many of the CT lot is more likely Aluminum which does melt below 600C

DaveD

iTrader: (2)

D'oh!
Thanks for that, I was trying to point out the fire weakened the structure - kinda lost the plot trying to point out all the mistakes! I could imagine the fire burning hotter than 600degC though, due to the "firestorm" effect and the amount of air it could consume with all the windows blown out etc.....

OllyK

Seems steel melts around 1370C (depending on the type) - wasn't too far off.

Forced air etc may increase the heat a little, but to be honest I think it's a moot point, the steel doesn't need to melt to loose structural integrity. Already bent due to the force of the collison so the forces are working against it, it wouldn't take much to weaken it more. Most strutural engineers were impressed by how the long the towers actually stayed up before the final collapse.

stilover

The US Government thanks all of you Non-thinker's. You believe what they tell you to believe.

For those of you that want to think for yourselves, check out the link & buy yourself a copy.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...SI_PR4_PCN_BIX

And no, it's not me selling them.

OllyK

So you spout a load of information, which is shown to be inaccurate, you ignore that and spout some more which gets shown to be bogus as well and then you gracefully move on ignoring everything, not even a counter comment just glib comment. Try actually referencing more than 1 source, at the moment you are no better than somebody claiming everything in the Sport is absolute fact, try reading a few other papers and see what they say on the subject.

stilover

And who say's it's inaccurate ???? The US government. Everything said about 9/11 that is different from what the US government says is a conspiracy theory. Why not buy a copy of the DVD and see for yourself.
I to believed everything the US government said about 9/11, and it was only when I watched this DVD, that I was able to say things just don't add up. I didn't even want to watch it, but I'm pleased I did.

Just watch it and see. What harm will it do ??

davegtt

Facts say some of it is inaccurate. Although I do believe people have a right to be suspicious of some of the things that have gone on. Really makes interesting reading but you can always pick flaws in everything, regardless of it being legit etc.

If it was a missile that hit the Pentegon does your DVD explain where that paticular plane and 59 passengers and staff dissapearred to and where their families came from or were they just made up people?

OllyK

It's patently obvious you haven't read the document that I've directed you at, if you had, you'd see there are huge numbers of independant experts that have provided opinion. Further more it points out the blatant errors and assumptions made by the CT crew, things like getting the type of plane wrong, the type of engine in use on the plane wrong.

Why not read the FREE document I've directed you at? I have seen the Loose chage video which again is freely available on the net, it looks to me that the DVD your pointing at is just a DVD copy of the same video. Not that DVD is copyright free - so why not post it somewhere and we can download it and pass comment.

I have seen what I believe to be the same DVD, nothing in that DVD adds up, wild claims are made by people on the street rather than experts. Many quotes are not cited. The evidence put forward is selectively presented to avoid showing the other evidence from the same sources that does not support their delusion.

Ask yourself some questions. If the Twin Towers really were blown up by explosives, how did they get the hundreds of tonnes of explosves in to the building and rigged up, with nobody realising or are you claiming that everybody that worked in the Twin Towers was in on the consipracy, including the ones that died? For the US government to have initiated this would require literally thousands of people to be in on it. When Bill Clinton can't keep a **** with his secretary secret, what chance do you think there is of keeping thousands of people quiet, or did the CIA round them all up and brain wash them?

OllyK

Here's a bigger question, if it was a missile, how did all that plane wreckage get on the front lawn of the pentagon?

GaryCat

They are all being kept hostage in Area 51 waiting for the next Heavens Gate comet to take them to another dimension.

davegtt

Ahhh Ok, Im a believer now, that nasty government killing all them innocents in the WTC on purpose to go and get some oil Even though the backlash of 9/11 was on Afganistan and not Iraq

OllyK

What I want to know is why the CT'ists have to make things so damn complex. If they claimed the CIA trained up a dozen or so guys to hijack 4 planes and crash 2 in to the WTC, 1 in to the Pentagon and 1 in to the Whitehouse to give them an opportunity to go off kicking ***, then'd I'd just about buy in to that. The evidence still all fits. But when they start claiming that they blew the WTC up with explosives, used missles on the Pentagon and so on, it just gets all too far fetched and just doesn't remotely tie up with the evidence.

scoobynutta555

Olly. I've seen a dvd that explains how all this is possible. It's amazing that you can't pull your head from your **** and see the light



















The film Men In Black showcases the device to make all what you say possible, it's a neutralizer I believe

OllyK

And for those that like to dig around in different sources here's some more reading:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1227842.html
http://eric.bart.free.fr/iwpb/witness.html
http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoud.../witnesses.htm
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001...7.victims.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...sasterngs.html

OllyK

Thought it was neuralizer and in zaps neurons?

Any which way, it's more plausible than some of the stuff on Loose Change, but then again some of them do seem to think no planes hit the WTC and the MIB were involved

richie001

iTrader: (3)

take a look at www.pentagonstrike.co.uk something worth looking at.

stilover

All the evidence ??????? One piece of plane. Where's all the rest. I never said a missile hit the pentagon. I said a mini remote controlled spy plane hit it. You don't get much wreckage from a small spy plane do you. Where is all the luggage from the plane? Where are all the body parts? All the seats? Suppose they disintegrated on impact ?

Independent reports are not always independent !!!!!!

Unless the US government told you they were !!!!!!

OllyK

I admit the photo is focussing on a large bit, but what's all the other metallic stuff in the background? But to keep you happy:






ALL from the document I keep telling you to read. If you read it, you'll find more pictures of the wreckage, wreckage with AA paintwork, wreckage parts that are of sufficient size to be recognisable and can be matched to parts of a 757

Why go to the trouble of using a remote spy plane when we KNOW 3 other full sized aircraft were used the same day? What about all the witnesses that saw the plane? Appart from SWAG - what evidence do you have it was a remote controlled spy plane over anything else?

Body parts were found, read the practical mechanics report I cited. DNA has been found for almost all the people that were on the plane. Clothing was found, personal effects etc, come on you're about 6 months behind, the Loose Change bunch have already changed their story about this due to the DNA evidence and are claiming the passengers were butchered and parts of them put in the payload of the missle so that the DNA would be found

And unsubstantiated ramblings of the paranoid are well, unsubstantiated ramblings of the paranoid.

Abdabz

Some people just cannot accept CT's, I mean my dad still thinks man landed on the moon in 1969 - the dumbass