Trade centre buildings.....

Would you be saying same to a muslim/christian or any other religious believer about there beliefs? Just as much unbelievable nonsense but yet it is socially accepted

 

Yes i would, but only if they asked. I'm a committed atheist.

 

The Bayeaux Tapestry did try to authenticate the legitimacy of William's claim to the English throne, but there still exist many other theories on those events. As a historical account - arrows go in eyes, axes break heads and if there had been planes, they would have exploded on impact. Like every other one before it to hit a solid surface, or even water.

 

I miss Roundsman.

 

All ********. Entertaining ******** but ******** nevertheless.

 

Pat Mustard?

 

I would guess the difference is that the planes were flown into the buildings at full speed and pretty much straight on: not restricted by evasive action, pilot reducing speed if mechanical malfunction etc. The anglo-saxon chronicler wrote that a "great ball of fire appeared over the ocean" (what he meant was the vikings had arrived) I'm pretty sure many on here would believe that there actually was a great ball of fire

 

Wait, there were no planes at all?

 

I've always thought we weren't told the true story of what happened. The aircraft flown into each tower don't look like passenger planes to me. It would have been even more alarming, not to mention embarrassing, if it had been admitted that military planes had been used. If there was a controlled demolition it might have been done to hide that evidence.

 

No, even the arrow in the eye was CGIed...

 

I'm no scientist but...

...some of the pseudo intellectual crap being spouted on some of those conspiracy sites beggars belief...

Plane shaped holes too narrow/small. aluminium vs steel .... fireballs/explosions in wrong places/delayed wrong engine found in street? building collapsing in the wrong way. must have been missiles or planes CGI'd into videos!! Jeez..

1 100 tons of aluminium hitting steel concrete would shred - test flying jets into concrete slabs prove it. Err... but the trade centre was not a wall of solid concrete or steel. There was a lot of glass and it isnt just 100 tons of aluminium flying into it. Many parts engines etc are carbon fibre/steel/ liquid fuel in the wings not to mention a tube full of passengers and luggage all adding up to much more than 100 tons. Plane wings would probably shear and explosions of fuel and combustible materials would be randomly placed and at different times.

2 Experienced pilots, we are told by conspiracy theorists, would have found it very hard to manoeuver planes to hit the towers. Yet we are told by the same conspirators that pre rigged charges were detonated to simulate the crash planes which would have required even more accuracy as they had to hit not only the correct buildings but the exact floors where the first charges were set to explode. they say some charges were located in the wrong places "giving the game away".

So a fundamental error in meticulous planning. To cover this they say it was not a plane at all but explosions / missiles and CGI. So how many witnesses were in on this conspiracy. Half the population of Manhatten saw the planes hit the towers. The wrong engine was found in the street and a wrong plane part at the Pentagon. Another couple of basic errors in a meticulously planned operation??

Yeah! Whatever?

"Commercial planes of that type cannot fly at those speeds at that altitude". True. 'Operationally' they can't as severe damage would occur to turbines and structure and the engine cannot produce sufficient power except at high altitudes where air density is less. But a dive before levelling off would increase airspeed well beyond the norm even if the structural damage was occuring and engines stalling. However this would not matter to the pilots as they are about to fly into a building anyway. Besides all aircraft can exceed operational limits to quite a high level before they actually fall apart.

250 tons impacting at 350-500 kph can, and did, bring down a tall structure as the sheer weight bearing down on the damaged central core however reinforced would have started a cascade. A house of cards might only collapse so many levels if the layer near the top is disturbed but that is a pyramid structure . A tower may stay up if only the top couple of floors are hit but part way down,(think Jenga) Regardless of techno babble weakened steel is not going to supports thousands of tons of concrete and steel bearing down and once it starts to fall the weight on floors below will increase exponentially as more and more of the building succumbs to the collapsing debris. The building will have been built to withstand high winds, light aircraft and small commercial plane strikes, fires and explosions but who would have foreseen the need to withstand a deliberate strike from a commercial airline flying at full speed?

Looking at some of the blogs and sites there are people on there purporting to be commercial pilots who cant even spell words that are part of the everyday vocabulary of an airline pilot (weigh points??)

Besides, I am not sure where you would find the pilots would would take part in a Jihaad in the name of the Great American Greenback
if that is the reason carried out mass murder/genocide.

As an aside I tried the manoeuvre (albeit on fairly basic flight simulator ) of the Hudson River pilot who took off from La Guardia and ditched safely into the River a few years back. I tried 20 times before I actually managed to avoid the bridge and ditch without killing everyone on board (just to highlight it isn't easy to fly one of those big airliners even on a Flight sim) However, in spite of conspiracy theorists quoting pilots saying it is almost impossible to fly and airliner into the towers like they were I was able to do it fairly consistently even configuring the simulator with crosswinds etc and at various angles of approach and airspeed (and I know very little about flying). It was a bit macabre doing this but I was curious to know if it really was that hard to hit building of that size with a big aircraft as they were telling us.

I may be incredibly naive but it does a great disservice to all those who died by trying to deflect blame. RIP

 

Re: I'm no scientist but...

^^^^this^^^^^

 

For the more condescending of yesterdays respondees .... ITV tonight.

9pm. Truth, Lies and Conspiracies. So its not just a few sackless BBS'ers who have misgivings.

[FONT=&quot]Victims' relatives, a senior politician and people working inside the intelligence agencies at the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks discuss their belief of a cover-up. Ever since the atrocities, the conspiracy theories - some credible, some downright wacky - have been claimed and counter-claimed, but 15 years later serious concerns remain that the real story surrounding that fateful day is yet to be told, as polls reveal that half of Americans still don't think they've been told the whole story[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
Read more at http://www.tvguide.co.uk/detail/2467266/120908121/9-11-truth-lies-conspiracies#CfmYEecLPrG6Y1rD.99[/FONT]

 

Re: For the more condescending of yesterdays respondees .... ITV tonight.

What I've always wanted to know, is what the explosions were that were heard in the lobby/basement areas of the towers by the firefighters? How would the impact of a plane, so far up the structure, cause these explosions so far down the building (and below)?