Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 78 of 78

Thread: 911 conspiracy?

  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    Global warming is real 97% of the science community agree on it, comparing that to this makes zero sense.

    This whole WTC truther sh1t is embarrassing and dumb.
    Not to derail the discussion, but science doesn't work like that. Science is not consensus building. It is presenting theories and then attempting to prove or disprove them. Theories are supported by observable and independently repeatable results, not some made up computer model that CAN'T actually model real life. Especially when enough time has passed to irrefutably see that some of the near term "predictions" of AGAW supporters are not happening.

    At one point Galileo stood alone within the scientific community. How did that work out for the majority?

    I always wondered why Global Warming advocates would cite consensus as proof. It immediately debunks their "scientific knowledge" since consensus in science is irrelevant.

  2. #62
    Blacktop and vehicles are awesome for the earth.


    Quote Originally Posted by GandWFan View Post
    Not to derail the discussion, but science doesn't work like that. Science is not consensus building. It is presenting theories and then attempting to prove or disprove them. Theories are supported by observable and independently repeatable results, not some made up computer model that CAN'T actually model real life. Especially when enough time has passed to irrefutably see that some of the near term "predictions" of AGAW supporters are not happening.

    At one point Galileo stood alone within the scientific community. How did that work out for the majority?

    I always wondered why Global Warming advocates would cite consensus as proof. It immediately debunks their "scientific knowledge" since consensus in science is irrelevant.

  3. #63
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,282
    When will this crap die? Taken strictly from the standpoint of known principles of both firefighting and engineering, there's no curiosity as to why all three buildings fell. The towers themselves were built using truss construction -- one of the most extreme examples of truss construction before or since -- to give the buildings their distinct open floor plans (no columns). The central core and the outside shell provided all the support for the trusses. Aesthetically wonderful, that construction proved to be the towers' downfall -- literally. We call truss-constructed buildings "fireman killers," even on the scale of small sh:tty convenience stores. In Seaford (my town) we know exactly where every truss-constructed structure is, and it impacts the firefighting tactics that will be used upon arriving at the fire. Trussed structures will collapse relatively quickly when their weak points are exposed to fire -- and every truss has two distinct weak points; where they connect to the outer walls (or in the case of the towers, the outer walls and inner core) of the building. Once one truss fails, the trusses adjacent to it fail and so on, like dominoes. That's horizontally. Vertically, they fall and the building pancakes. All truthers blather on about "the first time in history a steel constructed building fell." The fire load in those buildings was also unprecedented in scope and intensity, and it burned uncontrolled. That being said, had the same plane that hit either tower hit the empire state building instead, it would have f-cked up the building horribly, but the building would not have collapsed -- at least not below the impact zone. And that's simply because of the way the steel structure was built as opposed to the truss construction of the towers.

    As for tower 7, truthers willfully ignore the fact that there was indeed an almost 20-story high gash in the building, and a deisel-fueled fire that burned uncontrolled for more than 8 hours. The FDNY had a transit aimed at the upper floors of the building during the day and determined that the building was in fact leaning (and tilting very slowly), which is why they wisely did not send firefighters into the building.

    Anyone with even a basic knowledge of physics/engineering/firefighting understands that the whole truther movement -- at least in the context of the buildings falling -- is complete jackassery.

  4. #64
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,919
    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    Citizens were scared into agreeing to give up their rights after 911 all to help in the cause of fighting terrorism. The "Patriot Act" and other government policies that were put in place to protect us but really wound up taking our rights away. Imagine "IF" 911 was a conspiracy. How much easier it would be for the elite to control us. Imagine if the elite who control our government could get even more information on us creating a police state like we've seen from recent governments in the past like communist Russia, Nazi Germany , and tyrannical governments like in Argentina in the 1980s where people just disappeared for speaking out against what they thought was wrong about their government. The following article is, IMO, a direct affect of the events of 911. Giving up rights all in the name of fighting terrorism just keeps steam rolling citizens with no end in sight. Pay attention especially to Bloomberg's defeated attitude (wink wink) about the subject rather than fighting against it

    http://www.businessinsider.com/mayor...-in-nyc-2013-3

    New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg considers the domestic use of military-style drones "scary" but says that there is no way to stop it.

    “Everybody wants their privacy, but I don’t know how you’re going to maintain it,” Bloomberg said on his weekly radio show. “It’s just we’re going into a different world, uncharted, and, like it or not, what people can do, what governments can do, is different ... you can’t keep the tides from coming in.”

    In September a Congressional Research report stated that domestic drones may be able to bypass constitutional privacy safeguards because of their high level of sophistication.

    At least 81 entities, including 17 police departments, have applied for permission to fly drones in U.S. airspace.

    But the mayor seems to be referring to something more omnipresent, like having drones with ARGUS technology flying 17,500 feet above the Big Apple while transmitting high resolution images of people.

    "There'll be cameras every place" within five years, Bloomberg estimated. "We're going to have more visibility and less privacy. I just don't see how you could stop that."

    The mayor figures that if the city already has security cameras in strategic places around the city — 2,400 in Manhattan alone as of 1998 — then drones aren't any different.

    “It's scary. What’s the difference whether the drones up in the air or in the building?” Bloomberg said. “I mean intellectually, I have trouble making a distinction. And you know you're going to have face recognition software."

    Donna Lieberman of the New York Civil Liberties Union told CBS that the mayor's nonchalance does nothing to quell legitimate concerns that the government could save the data to analyze it.

    “It’s disappointing that the mayor shows such disdain for the legitimate concern of New Yorkers about their privacy," she said. "None of us expects that we’ll go unseen when we’re out on the street, but we also have the right to expect that the government isn’t making a permanent record."
    Didn't you start a thread on this already? Not that I'm sorry to see the current topic derailed.....but squeeze in the agenda wherever it fits, eh?



    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    Blacktop and vehicles are awesome for the earth.
    Actually, the earth could give two sh!ts, it's the animals living on it that may have a problem. To state that anything we do here is "bad" for the planet on any significant level is arrogance at its most high.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by shakin318 View Post
    When will this crap die? Taken strictly from the standpoint of known principles of both firefighting and engineering, there's no curiosity as to why all three buildings fell. The towers themselves were built using truss construction -- one of the most extreme examples of truss construction before or since -- to give the buildings their distinct open floor plans (no columns). The central core and the outside shell provided all the support for the trusses. Aesthetically wonderful, that construction proved to be the towers' downfall -- literally. We call truss-constructed buildings "fireman killers," even on the scale of small sh:tty convenience stores. In Seaford (my town) we know exactly where every truss-constructed structure is, and it impacts the firefighting tactics that will be used upon arriving at the fire. Trussed structures will collapse relatively quickly when their weak points are exposed to fire -- and every truss has two distinct weak points; where they connect to the outer walls (or in the case of the towers, the outer walls and inner core) of the building. Once one truss fails, the trusses adjacent to it fail and so on, like dominoes. That's horizontally. Vertically, they fall and the building pancakes. All truthers blather on about "the first time in history a steel constructed building fell." The fire load in those buildings was also unprecedented in scope and intensity, and it burned uncontrolled. That being said, had the same plane that hit either tower hit the empire state building instead, it would have f-cked up the building horribly, but the building would not have collapsed -- at least not below the impact zone. And that's simply because of the way the steel structure was built as opposed to the truss construction of the towers.

    As for tower 7, truthers willfully ignore the fact that there was indeed an almost 20-story high gash in the building, and a deisel-fueled fire that burned uncontrolled for more than 8 hours. The FDNY had a transit aimed at the upper floors of the building during the day and determined that the building was in fact leaning (and tilting very slowly), which is why they wisely did not send firefighters into the building.

    Anyone with even a basic knowledge of physics/engineering/firefighting understands that the whole truther movement -- at least in the context of the buildings falling -- is complete jackassery.
    Thanks for the clear elucidation and sharing of your expertise. I knew nothing about the dynamics of truss construction. Your explanation was eye opening.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    Blacktop and vehicles are awesome for the earth.
    Less than a pimple on the Earth's ass. But back to the topic at hand...

    9/11 was just as it was portrayed. No conspiracy, certainly not from the government. The government boobs could not even figure out how to keep horse gambling (OTB) profitable in the city, a task that supposedly low-brow bookies have been doing for centuries. They certainly could not cook-up and execute such a far reaching conspiracy without being found out.

  7. #67
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,282
    Quote Originally Posted by Borgoguy View Post
    Thanks for the clear elucidation and sharing of your expertise. I knew nothing about the dynamics of truss construction. Your explanation was eye opening.
    You're welcome. There are plenty of aspects of trutherism that may be open to debate (who was behind it all, etc.) but when it comes to the science of how and why those buildings fell, the conspiracy stories are laughable.

  8. #68
    Actually, the earth could give two sh!ts, it's the animals living on it that may have a problem. To state that anything we do here is "bad" for the planet on any significant level is arrogance at its most high.
    We have done a lot a bad sh1t to the planet, if being arrogant is stating the obvious so be it. Places like Cheshire Ohio are living proof of it.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by GandWFan View Post
    9/11 was just as it was portrayed. No conspiracy, certainly not from the government. The government boobs could not even figure out how to keep horse gambling (OTB) profitable in the city, a task that supposedly low-brow bookies have been doing for centuries. They certainly could not cook-up and execute such a far reaching conspiracy without being found out.
    Agreed about 9-11 not being a conspiracy.

  10. #70
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,919
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    We have done a lot a bad sh1t to the planet, if being arrogant is stating the obvious so be it. Places like Cheshire Ohio are living proof of it.
    That's not doing something to the planet, that's doing something that hurts those living on the planet. Not trying to split hairs here, but the fact is we couldn't effect any change on the planet that would ultimately destroy it, only make it inhospitable for us (or something else). That's why I said it was arrogant to think otherwise.

  11. #71
    Back at the end of WWII, Ike insisted that the German people be forced to see the atrocities that were performed at the death camps and also insisted that there be plenty of pictures taken. You know why? Because he knew that people some day might try to say that it never happened. Threads like these prove that good old Ike knew what he was talking about.

    The single biggest factor involved with 9/11 is the one that gets totally overlooked. If not for the scare tactics used by the weaponophobes to disarm our pilots, that disaster and the war that followed would never have happened.

    Oh, this is a site that came up that day. It's one of the best. Trust me though, it isn't easy to get through. http://attacked911.tripod.com/
    Last edited by Pats1960; 03-24-2013 at 02:53 PM.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetworks View Post
    That's not doing something to the planet, that's doing something that hurts those living on the planet. Not trying to split hairs here, but the fact is we couldn't effect any change on the planet that would ultimately destroy it, only make it inhospitable for us (or something else). That's why I said it was arrogant to think otherwise.
    The greatest disservice that has been done to the people of the world was done by the scientists who were given the responsibility to take the readings to see what effect global warming was having on our planet. Once they fudged those numbers they took away any chance we had to learn exactly what we could do about it.

  13. #73
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,919
    Quote Originally Posted by Pats1960 View Post
    The greatest disservice that has been done to the people of the world was done by the scientists who were given the responsibility to take the readings to see what effect global warming was having on our planet. Once they fudged those numbers they took away any chance we had to learn exactly what we could do about it.
    A broken, flawed peer-review system, primarily due to funding conflicts. That's the biggest problem in science, regardless of the field of study.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetworks View Post
    That's not doing something to the planet, that's doing something that hurts those living on the planet. Not trying to split hairs here, but the fact is we couldn't effect any change on the planet that would ultimately destroy it, only make it inhospitable for us (or something else). That's why I said it was arrogant to think otherwise.
    You are splitting hairs because if we are not here who gives a F? There wouldn't be a need for any discussion if there aren't anyone alive to discuss it.

  15. #75
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,919
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    You are splitting hairs because if we are not here who gives a F? There wouldn't be a need for any discussion if there aren't anyone alive to discuss it.


    Your very argument is in and of itself, human-centric and therefore arrogant.

    But I see where this is going so, yes, you're right, I'm wrong, etcetera and so forth, ad infinitum.

  16. #76
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,564
    I'm convinced. Forget 9/11. It's this forum that is a conspiracy - part of the larger plan to make us all dumber.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetworks View Post


    Your very argument is in and of itself, human-centric and therefore arrogant.

    But I see where this is going so, yes, you're right, I'm wrong, etcetera and so forth, ad infinitum.
    Gee thanks.

  18. #78
    Bewildered Beast
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    SF via Strong Island
    Posts
    30,777
    Quote Originally Posted by copernicus View Post
    Citizens were scared into agreeing to give up their rights after 911 all to help in the cause of fighting terrorism. The "Patriot Act" and other government policies that were put in place to protect us but really wound up taking our rights away. Imagine "IF" 911 was a conspiracy. How much easier it would be for the elite to control us. Imagine if the elite who control our government could get even more information on us creating a police state like we've seen from recent governments in the past like communist Russia, Nazi Germany , and tyrannical governments like in Argentina in the 1980s where people just disappeared for speaking out against what they thought was wrong about their government. The following article is, IMO, a direct affect of the events of 911. Giving up rights all in the name of fighting terrorism just keeps steam rolling citizens with no end in sight. Pay attention especially to Bloomberg's defeated attitude (wink wink) about the subject rather than fighting against it

    http://www.businessinsider.com/mayor...-in-nyc-2013-3

    New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg considers the domestic use of military-style drones "scary" but says that there is no way to stop it.

    “Everybody wants their privacy, but I don’t know how you’re going to maintain it,” Bloomberg said on his weekly radio show. “It’s just we’re going into a different world, uncharted, and, like it or not, what people can do, what governments can do, is different ... you can’t keep the tides from coming in.”

    In September a Congressional Research report stated that domestic drones may be able to bypass constitutional privacy safeguards because of their high level of sophistication.

    At least 81 entities, including 17 police departments, have applied for permission to fly drones in U.S. airspace.

    But the mayor seems to be referring to something more omnipresent, like having drones with ARGUS technology flying 17,500 feet above the Big Apple while transmitting high resolution images of people.

    "There'll be cameras every place" within five years, Bloomberg estimated. "We're going to have more visibility and less privacy. I just don't see how you could stop that."

    The mayor figures that if the city already has security cameras in strategic places around the city — 2,400 in Manhattan alone as of 1998 — then drones aren't any different.

    “It's scary. What’s the difference whether the drones up in the air or in the building?” Bloomberg said. “I mean intellectually, I have trouble making a distinction. And you know you're going to have face recognition software."

    Donna Lieberman of the New York Civil Liberties Union told CBS that the mayor's nonchalance does nothing to quell legitimate concerns that the government could save the data to analyze it.

    “It’s disappointing that the mayor shows such disdain for the legitimate concern of New Yorkers about their privacy," she said. "None of us expects that we’ll go unseen when we’re out on the street, but we also have the right to expect that the government isn’t making a permanent record."
    Analyze all that data? To do what; send us the right pizza flyer?

    No more of these threads; what a disrespectful bunch of poo.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us