America is exceptional- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 119 of 119
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792

    America is exceptional

    That sh!t only happens in other countries.

    Discuss.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  2. #2
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Huh? What sh1t?

  3. #3
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Which America are we discussing? There's more than one.

  4. #4
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,348
    This space intentionally left blank. We apologise for any inconvenience.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,708
    ^ sure does.

  6. #6
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck then...
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  7. #7
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    OK. So, are we discussing the duck-head, the feet, the tail....

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Hmm, it does. Looks like a grebe specifically...

    Procter, just starting my own thread on 9/11 and how the evidence seems to clearly disprove the official story, and that the kind of evil government / banker masterminds behind that attack are actually home grown (I'm Canadian, but it's not much different up here). That would imply that all the f*cked up sh!t we like to accuse other countries of actually occurs here too.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  9. #9
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Ok, your original post didn't go there but I'll bite.

    I've seen lots of those documentaries, like Loose Change, but I've never seen any credible evidence or credible witness who an attest to any part of the conspiracy theory.

    In general these big conspiracy theories are fun to watch, enticing, your mind wants to believe (because it would be so god-d*mn exciting if it were true!) but you've gotta realize there is profit motive in books, and now, Youtube ad revenue, in all these film makers and authors so their motives are just as questionable as the people they claim to expose. And, the documentaries are filled with all sorts of wrong information, like "No steel structure has ever collapsed from fire, ever." They show graphs of steel tensile strength at different temps, flashing them up for 5s to seem credible but neglecting important details. I studied steel failure rates at different temperatures for my B.S Mech Eng and B.S. Matl Sci in college (late 90s). The WTC steel structure failure is 100% consistent with a slow, long, hot burn of combustible materials, heating up the steel enough, for long enough time, to make it fail. Steel begins to change at hotter temperatures, given some time, as the metal is basically going through annealing, new grains are nucleating and growing, until the metal softens and loses tensile strength and fails.

    Now, to the specific possibility of the government pulling off a massive conspiracy to demolish the world trade center through conventional demolitions, or, replace 4 passenger planes full of citizens with unmarked 767's and flown them by remote into WTC and Pentagon, while kidnapping and/or killing all those passengers, or, faking their lives in the first place.

    Ok. Let's say this happened. Seriously, you REALLY think the government is competent enough to pull off something like that???? And keep it secret for over a decade?

    First, what would you say is the the government's top, top secrets over the last 50 years? They have pretty much all been compromised. Our ICBM and nuclear warhead technology has been compromised 10's of times, being shared with the Russians, Chinese, Israelis, and even the Pakistanis, see here for just a sample. Even going back to the Manhattan project, when the number of people aware of the US nuclear program was at its smallest, still there were spies and secrets were broken.

    Take two more recent examples:
    7 Years of US missteps, civilian killings and atrocities uncovered by Bradley Manning
    NSA spying on all americans. Pretty F**ing important to keep that secret. Didn't happen. Snowden.

    So . . . again, you think that the great and powerful U.S. Gov was able to destroy its own towers and Pentagon, a task easily requiring the coordination of hundreds if not over a thousand individuals. Really.

    Really?

    The U.S. government.

    Really.

  10. #10
    nvphatty
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    Hmm, it does. Looks like a grebe specifically...

    Procter, just starting my own thread on 9/11 and how the evidence seems to clearly disprove the official story, and that the kind of evil government / banker masterminds behind that attack are actually home grown (I'm Canadian, but it's not much different up here). That would imply that all the f*cked up sh!t we like to accuse other countries of actually occurs here too.
    i suggest you put down the kool-aid and seek mental help. Oh and BTW even politics in the OC is not acceptable.

  11. #11
    High Desert MTBer
    Reputation: rockerc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5,461
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    i suggest you put down the kool-aid and seek mental help. Oh and BTW even politics in the OC is not acceptable.
    I'm not sure that "evil government/banker masterminds" qualify as politics, even tho both are equally sad in my book. I prefer to talk about how the Great Duck Conspiracy is conspiring to trample all over us with its great webbed feet. (Which incidentally are rooted in Siberia, altho the picture does not show that... the Russkies are behind it all!!!)
    It's all Here. Now.

  12. #12
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    I think this site needs a political topics ONLY forum.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,193
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Ok, your original post didn't go there but I'll bite. .......................

    Really?

    The U.S. government.

    Really.

    That right there disproves any and all conspiracy theories. It's not like the movies where people can keep quite. People like to talk.

  14. #14
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Snowden would have spilled the beans by now.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  15. #15
    Evolutionsverlierer
    Reputation: acer66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,008
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    I think this site needs a political topics ONLY forum.
    and while you're at it throw in religion, guns, gays etc. in the mix and you have the perfect recipe for some fun reading material.


  16. #16
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Well, since I'm the one who originally told him to go and start his own thread on 9/11 conspiracy theories, you can just all blame me for whatever gets posted up here.
    Or thank me.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Thanks for the nice response Procter. Another mechanical engineer! I admit that I too was uncomfortably convinced for a long time, in large part because I read things like headlines in Popular Mechanics and such assuring me that the collapse was consistent with how buildings fall. And yes Youtube has some pretty bizarre videos. But I think that's inherent after an event like this; every skeptic is attracted to it, both the fringe and the more mainstream ones, and the fringe does a bit of a disservice to the legitimate skeptics. For example, this whole "chemtrail" thing. Has anyone pushing this chemtrails conspiracy bothered to notice their car exhaust on a cold morning?? (Water vapour, a product of combustion, condensing out in the colder temperatures). And you know, planes burn fuel, just like cars do?

    But I digress; there is a lot of good information on the web and on youtube if you can sift through it, and the problems they reveal just can't be wished away IMHO. There are hundreds of inconsistencies with the official story, each one of which would be sufficient to debunk it. Put them all together and it paints a very interesting and disturbing story, not only about what happened on that day, but also about how we as a society interact with our leadership.

    The most telling inconsistency for me, coming from a technical background, is this: apparently a ball dropped from the height of the WTC takes 8 seconds, minus air resistance, to reach the ground. The buildings, after they began collapsing, took 10 seconds to totally fall (so people tell me; I haven't measured it myself but this seems about right after seeing the footage). This would imply that there was essentially zero resistance for the entire duration and distance of the collapse (let's chalk that extra 2 seconds up to air resistance...) Really? From a building that was still structurally sound only moments before the collapse? All politics and conspiracy aside, my engineering training tells me that this is totally physically impossible. The only way the building could have collapsed that way is if the entire support structure, from top to bottom, had simultaneously and instantly disintegrated. For this to occur according to the official story would imply that the heat (apparently all from one plane near the top of the building) from the burning kerosene had to drip down the central column all the way to the ground, and not only this, but had to be hot enough to melt the metal as you describe. I'm not going to do the math on the energy released from the amount of fuel in a jetliner, but I am pretty sure this is beyond impossible. I agree that metal crystal structures can deform in high temperatures and cause failure (I've seen pictures of melted metal beams draped over charred but still standing wooden beams). Where is the evidence of such intense fires burning down the entire building? The whole thing would have had to be completely engulfed in flames. Yes, buildings sometimes collapse when on fire; but not buildings that are 80% totally intact, and which have such low intensity fires that people are able to walk out! There were little or no fires in lower levels (other than from the bombs that went off shortly after impact, to pre-weaken the structures at the base). How could these temperatures have been reached? And how could the building be so otherwise sound, and then instantly, a second later, the whole thing just magically "melts" all at once? (Melting is a slow process, not one that engulfs an entire building over the span of 5 seconds). Did the forces from the falling structures above cause the already weakened members below to collapse, and result in the so-called "pancake effect"? At <i>freefall speed????</i>. Surely the fall would have been <i>somewhat</i> slowed by the many thousand tons of otherwise structurally sound material beneath it??? lol The ONLY way to get this effect in such a structure is if it is systematically demolished in key points using explosives and other techniques. And this is indeed revealed if one looks at the footage and notes the flashes in the windows in certain "random" areas of the building, that move in advance, only a few floors below, the free-falling wave of debris from above, implying that the explosives were controlled remotely and triggered sequentially as the building fell in order to achieve the freefall effect.

    And never mind Building 7, which fell in the exact same manner, yet had only minor fire damage! I challenge you to provide one example from history of a building falling in that manner. There are tons and tons of such discrepancies in the whole story (not the least of which being that many of the accused hijackers actually didn't die in the plane crashes and were flying commercial airliners in Saudi Arabia at the time of the attacks, apparently!)

    But what I find more interesting is how so many people can believe in the official story. You say that the task would require the coordination of hundreds if not over a thousand individuals. This is precisely why it would be impossible for a few uncoordinated sand people from the Middle East to pull it off. And you object that it would be impossible to keep it secret? Well that is what really intrigues me, because they didn't have to keep it secret; human nature and cognitive dissonance took care of that.

    Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we feel and the coping mechanisms we use to avoid having to deal with evidence which conflicts with our world views. Changing our world views is an uncomfortable thing to do as it requires one to totally change how one interacts with the world. To believe that the attacks were actually perpetrated by our own government, that terrorism comes from within, that the entire world isn't out to kill innocent Americans because of their supposed "freedoms" (lol), well that's not what most North Americans have been brought up believing.

    And in this environment there doesn't have to be an airtight wall of silence to keep the majority believing. All that's needed is for the media to be complicit in towing the official line, and then any witnesses (the more vocal or damaging ones magically disappear) or skeptics like me automatically get relegated into the crackpot category so that people can continue believing what they want to believe, and life goes on happily ever after, as long as we focus our fear towards those scary dark people on the other side of the world. But the problem is, our leaders are going to do this sort of thing again, and they are gaining more and more control over our society.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  18. #18
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Thanks Ray. The thread should go away as soon as somebody blames George Bush for 9/11. Or was Clinton to blame?
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  19. #19
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Ok, Mark:

    First, can we please not call them 'sand people'. That is an unnecessary epithet.

    Second: What was so hard about what they did? Seems much more plausible than a government conspiracy to do the same, which, would have been outed by now, as every other major secret the gov't has involving more than 100 people or so has been.

    Of the 9/11 report and the standard story, Hijacker-wise, which part exactly is too far fetched?

    1) That 4 teams of 4-5 individuals each hijacked 4 planes? Hijackings were proven to be quite easy over the course of the 1970s - 1990s, they happened 10's of times in the US and all over the world.
    2) That only 1 of the four, the passengers rallied and fought the hijackers? Again, in the history of 10's of hijacked planes, the passengers have never done this that I'm aware, because passengers (prior to 9/11) are thinking it will be a 'normal' hijacking... i.e. run out of fuel, land, be on the tarmac negotiating with authorities, SWAT will come in, etc. . Why did only 1 out of 4 groups of passengers storm the cabin? The difference was that the passengers were able to discover what was unfolding through cell phone communications with the ground and decided to make a decision which would likely result in their death: storm the cabin and likely crash the plane. Let's Roll baby.
    3) That ~25 people from Arab countries were able to get U.S. flight training un-noticed? First, you have to realize, pilots from all over the world routinely come to U.S flight schools for training. The different teams trained in different physical locations so as not to raise suspicion. Its not surprising that no one put it together. Yes some of the flight schools even called the FBI and asked them to look into it. The FBI gets a LOT of calls. Again the incompetence of the FBI and any large (LARGE) organization like the U.S. gov't in general comes into play here, I don't give them enough credit to have uncovered this in a pre 9/11 world. This is the FBI that didn't grab David Koresh from his morning jog. This it the FBI that rushed to blame Richard Jewel for the Centennial Park bombing. This is the FBI that had an informant inside the radical muslim group who carried out the 1993 WTC parking lot bombing, who directly told the FBI that they were planning a bombing and they didn't act or didn't believe him - unless, you believe, that this too was a conspiracy to allow that bombing to proceed. In that case I guess everything must be a conspiracy. its 10 straight years of conspiracy planning in the FBI by lots of different employees across two directors and multiple presidential administrations to finally take down those damn WTC towers!!!

    4) That once hijacked they could disable their identification transponder and fly off course un-noticed all the way to NY and DC? The pre 9/11 flight tracking systems were completely outdated technology, in many cases late 80's computers and unsophisticated tracking and integration between different air traffic controllers and U.S. Air Force central command was pretty sparse and un-centralized. Tracking over 1000 planes in the air at a time across the U.S. is inherently hard WITH transponders on. In all 4 cases (WTC, Pennsylvania crash and Pentagon) the flights disappeared for only an hour. I find it more plausible than a massive gov't cover up. Even today, 10 years post 9/11, there are still parts of the world where planes get lost, as evidenced by the recent Malaysian airlines disappearance.

    Let's explore the cover up angle as far as the planes go:
    Conspiracy theorists find it implausible that air traffic controllers could have lost 4 civilian planes and let them go off course and un-noticed for over an hour, meaning, someone would have spotted them. But, in the same sentence, they say, no, it was 3 unmarked military 767 drones which were flown into the WTC and Pentagon.

    Conspiracy theorists can't have it both ways - if you say air traffic controllers, and systems integration, would have been competent enough to find and track 4 missing civilian planes, then by that reasoning, someone would have also noticed 3 unmarked military 767s flying through U.S. airspace across non-standard flightpaths with no transponders as well.

  20. #20
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    What gets me about the standard 9/11 conspiracy theory is that it is much, much more difficult to pull off than the widely held hijacking scenario.

    I inadvertently walked past a security checkpoint 4 days before 9/11. Nobody noticed, nobody stopped me and so I just walked to the gate and got on the plane. Those were different times in terms of security.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  21. #21
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    Thanks Ray. The thread should go away as soon as somebody blames George Bush for 9/11. Or was Clinton to blame?
    Your'e very welcome. I could sense the GW thread was losing its' steam, so to speak, and the Meat got beat down by Mono so often that I am guessing that he might like an opportunity to get in on the beating for a change.

    And Mark in BC, nothing personal. I set you up for this, but you didn't have to take the bait. Hammer time.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Procter:

    1) I never said hijackings aren't possible. But I don't believe these guys who were terrible at flying planes could possibly perform the maneuvers they did though.

    2) I don't know much about that 4th plane that hit the field but I would presume it's all fabricated like the others. (I'm not implying that a plane didn't hit the towers; I don't know, but the circumstance of those impacts are fabricated).

    3) I don't know, maybe the FBI had orders to let the 1993 bombings happen, since it has the desired effect of whipping up xenophobia. I'm not sure how far the conspiracy goes or whether those previous bombings were conspiracy; I don't have all the answers, but I do know that those buildings did not fall from a plane impact. This then opens up a whole world of exploration. It's all very interesting when one opens oneself up to the reality that things are not what they are presented as. And those guys were actually trained in numerous secret service / military institutions beforehand, so it's not like they just hopped on a plane from Saudi Arabia and came out of the blue.

    4) Interesting, because a few months before the attacks, Rumsfeld changed the air emergency response protocol. He removed the "fast" protocol which is the one that authorizes a pilot to pursue and shoot down such an aircraft on his own accord, and left only the "slow" response that requires the pilot to get clearance from the government to shoot down a plane. Shortly afterwards they re-introduced the fast response protocol. The testimony from air traffic controllers in the area, that I've seen, doesn't corroborate what you are saying. I find it very hard to believe that in this most heavily guarded airspace in the world, surrounding the most heavily protected buildings in the world, that these hijackers could have gotten away with what they did. Air traffic controllers didn't lose the planes; the planes were giving off signals that were from military transponders. As a result they don't order them to be shot down; only non-military aircraft trigger this response.

    5) As an engineer, still interested to hear your thoughts on my technical critique of the impossibility of the buildings falling that way (I've since gone to the footage and confirmed that they did indeed fall in about 10 seconds -- basically freefall speed). You can go to this website which calculates that from 400 m it would take 9 seconds for a ball to hit the ground free falling.

    The Splat Calculator - A Free Fall Calculator
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  23. #23
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Ok, let's explore the duration of the fall.

    First, you can't easily compare a falling ball and several hundred thousand tons of steel building. The terminal velocity of an object falling is a function of air resistance relative to the object's mass (its basically surface area, aerodynamic resistance, and density). A tennis ball has a different terminal velocity than a bowling ball. The calculator you linked to actually even states at the bottom that it doesn't take air resistance and terminal velocity into account. So its not really useful for comparison. The free fall of your ball from the top of the WTC is definitely longer than the 9s provided by the calculator, because the ball will reach terminal velocity after about 100-150 feet of free fall. How much? impossible to say until we do some real calculations factoring in the drag coefficient.

    Now, let's discuss the free-fall of the building. Its EXTREMELY difficult for you or I or anyone for that matter to really model or predict the falling behavior of the top 20% of a 100+ story building. Regular equations for terminal velocity, which rely on drag coefficients of predictable shapes, are completely un-usable. Its difficult to say how much air-resistance is provided by the air trapped in each floor being forced out the windows of the building as the upper floors pancake down. Its difficult to say how much resistance the interior super-structure provides as it 'unzips' down under the weight of the above floors. As each floor pancakes, the total mass of the falling 'object' increases, and is better at fighting the air-resistance in the uncollapsed floors and the resistance of the remaining super-structure as it unzips. You'd have to do some experiments with mock-up buildings of various dimensions to establish a model for the behavior, allowing you to extrapolate the fall time for a large 100+ story building. Until you do that, you can't say whether 10s is fast, slow, or expected.

    Secondly, ok: So you're implying that there was some sort of controlled demolition involved. Meaning, someone put explosives at key points in the building super-structure, and triggered them as the top of the building falls, timed perfectly to increase the velocity of the falling building but not make it look like a real demolition looks like. See here for examples, WTC didn't look like that. In real demolitions, there is a burst of explosive activity all over as many charges go of simulatanesouly, creating a sort of shock wave that goes through the buildling momentarily, before free fall starts. But, let's say you disagree, and you think the videos of WTC collapse show controlled charges going off, I've seen loose change and they hint that air blowing out the windows (consistent with air being forced down through the building as it pancakes) is indeed demolition charges going off. Ok fine, let's say that happened.

    If true, wiring up such a demolition would require hundreds if not thousand of charges placed all over the building, and thousands of feet of wire. Where were the wires? Hidden behind walls? Where were the charges ? Hidden in elevator shafts and places where no one would see? Buildings with 30,000 people, hundreds of maintenance workers, no one noticed? No building maintenance guy noticed any one of the tens, maybe a hundred guys in fake maintenance uniforms who would have had to be involved, coming out of closets and risers and maintenance shafts? Over weeks time? Again, where are the wires? Carefully snaked through thousands of feet of wall and crawl space? Were they movie-style battery operated remote control charges? Those batteries last for weeks then? C'mon man.

    Maintenance guys have found and leaked far smaller operations in the past, even knowing full well exactly who was behind it, and knowing they'd be potentially prosecuted, like this guy :

    http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2006/04/6585-2/

  24. #24
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    OMG there is some serious BS being speculated in a couple of these posts above. Don't get me started. DJ please leave thread, please leave thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  25. #25
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    OMG there is some serious BS being speculated in a couple of these posts above. Don't get me started. DJ please leave thread, please leave thread.
    Soooo, are you saying that the Americas don't look like a duck when viewed sideways?

    You're plain nuts DJ!
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  26. #26
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    Soooo, are you saying that the Americas don't look like a duck when viewed sideways?

    You're plain nuts DJ!
    That's about the only thing that is correct up there ^^^^.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: theMeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,980
    As a wise man once said...
    "OMG there's some serious BS being speculated in a couple of these posts above. Don't get me started". Meat please leave thread, please leave thread
    Round and round we go

  28. #28
    Flappity flappity flap
    Reputation: Zowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,590
    ^^Considering what 'mainstream media' says about climate change compared to what you believe and discuss heavily, I was assuming you were going just about to blow everyone's mind on this topic, with evidence scoured from the darkest corners of information...

    I have to admit, I'm a little disappointed.

  29. #29
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,348
    Here we go again...

    This space intentionally left blank. We apologise for any inconvenience.

  30. #30
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtjunkie View Post
    omg there is some serious bs being speculated in a couple of these posts above. Don't get me started. Dj please leave thread, please leave thread.
    imssrabfgitdja

  31. #31
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    stnemercnI
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: theMeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,980
    No, you see, while i can see fault, motivation, and reason to believe or not both sides of the 9-11 argument, i also see half baked up truths from both sides of it. Also know that i don't know and can't prove it either way so I'm smart enough not to comment. But when it comes to agw, there's only one side that's half baked, and so far wrong btw. The other side is proven history.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zowie View Post
    about to blow
    Yeah, you may be right.America is exceptional-iceland-volcano-lava-flow-03.jpg
    Iceland, Sept 2, 2014
    Round and round we go

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,193
    Best post in this thread!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    Here we go again...


  34. #34
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by the-one1 View Post
    Best post in this thread!!!
    By a freaking mile!
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  35. #35
    ****** to the dirt
    Reputation: deke505's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5,122
    the duck it is a .......


    Name:  conspiracy.jpg
Views: 183
Size:  13.3 KB
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    There's some strange folk out there 'bouts. They have no sense of humor.
    My Blog

  36. #36
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Quote Originally Posted by deke505 View Post
    the duck it is a .......


    Name:  conspiracy.jpg
Views: 183
Size:  13.3 KB
    That guy's one of those "foilers".

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Proctor: you are absolutely correct about air resistance decreasing freefall speed (increasing freefall duration). But what you're missing is that your implied effects <i>go the other way!!!</i> They are actually supporting my argument, not yours!

    I think we'd both agree that a bowling ball dropped from 400 m will have negligible air resistance adding to that 9 s freefall time, right? What I have seen from the footage is that the <i>entire building</i> takes 10 seconds (maybe up to 12 since we can't see in the cloud of dust at the bottom), which is essentially freefall speed!

    That freefall calculator calculates the <i>maximum</i> freefall velocity, assuming there is no air resistance. The fact that the building fell almost as fast as a bowling ball would (in the absence of air even) implies that the building experienced virtually no resistance of any kind whatsoever! No air resistance, no air blowing out windows as each successive floor was breached, no resistance from crunching columns or desks, or tearing carpet, no pancaking floors -- zilch! All those resistance effects you mention should have actually <i>slowed</i> the building, so that it would have taken 20 or 30 seconds to fall.

    To tell you the truth, I'm amazed that it fell down as quickly as it did, even assuming that it was bombed on every floor, due to all the inertia involved. Specifically, the longer an object is in freefall the faster it falls, until it hits terminal velocity. So this means that the upper floors, as they were colliding with the lower floors as those ones were collapsing, would have been travelling faster than the recently bombed out lower floors that were just starting to fall. It would therefore take some of the energy (and speed) away from the upper floors as they hit the lower floors. This would account for the extra couple seconds it took for the tower to fall, beyond freefall speed. And again, I am amazed that it was only 2 seconds faster than airless freefall speed.

    How can I ignore this basic fact of physics? I can't. There is no way to explain it away. Is the footage I am seeing doctored? I don't know how you could doctor such a large event as a building like that falling. It's legit, and it does indeed take 10-12 s for the buildings to fall, and they were indeed 400 m high.

    This is undeniable proof, using elementary Newtonian kinematics, beyond any doubt whatsoever, that the buildings did not fall on their own accord, without help on the way down. This totally disproves the mainstream story we are given and it is sufficient to end the argument right there. As I said, I don't have many answers but I know those buildings were intentionally demolished, and if they lied about that then it stands to reason that they lied about everything else.

    Regarding some of your later points, I have heard it explained by an ex-CIA agent (people deride her as crazy, I don't know, maybe they're just doing that because she is saying these things), that there were numerous power failures in the middle of the night in the weeks prior to the attack, disabling the security cameras, and that heavy duty trucks pulled up to the buildings during that time. Can I personally verify this? No, but it would make sense. And I'm not so sure miles of cables would be needed if remote control and batteries could be used.

    I agree that the demolition examples you provide in your youtube video don't look like the WTC falling. But I would presume that this is because they usually detonate near the bottoms of the buildings to knock out the foundations, then let the whole thing above collapse downwards. For 9/11 they didn't want this effect, because obviously it wouldn't look like the planes were responsible if the buildings collapsed from the bottom up! So they modified the typical detonation procedure and went for the progressive downwards detonations on every few floors, going from top to bottom.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Here is the footage; time it yourself. At 5 minutes 50 seconds.

    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    At least this post has some action instead of all your guy's static beach pics.

    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    Here we go again...

    I can really appreciate the creamy bokeh (out of focus subject isolation) in that shot, I wonder what lens they used.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  41. #41
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    Proctor: you are absolutely correct about air resistance decreasing freefall speed (increasing freefall duration). But what you're missing is that your implied effects <i>go the other way!!!</i> They are actually supporting my argument, not yours!

    I think we'd both agree that a bowling ball dropped from 400 m will have negligible air resistance adding to that 9 s freefall time, right? What I have seen from the footage is that the <i>entire building</i> takes 10 seconds (maybe up to 12 since we can't see in the cloud of dust at the bottom), which is essentially freefall speed!
    Yup, I got that, I suspected that's what you'd say after I wrote that. I did NOT mean to imply that I think air resistance should have slowed down the WTC fall, or that the WTC should have fallen slower than 10s. The top of the WTC, as it falls, is a large, heavy mass of building materials and twisted metal, which does not have textbook, easily 'modeled' aerodynamics, and is not falling into a free open space of air, and, is accumulating mass and getting heavier as it goes down. Subsequently its very difficult to say whether it should have fallen faster, slower, or exactly 10s or 12s whatever you timed it at looking at the video. I count the start of the first tower collapse at 5:53 in the video, and, since the view is obstructed by buildings and there's so much dust, there's no way to tell when it reaches the bottom. Seems like about 6:10 to me, or, 17s. For the second tower collapse, it starts at 8:44, and, cuts to a different video before it hits bottom, so its completely impossible to say the actual time. If the cut from camera 1 to camera 2 is accurate and no time is lost or gained in that cut, I count 9:00 when it reaches bottom (16s). You see a quicker drop. I see a slower drop. People see what they want to see. These are digital recordings of original analog TV, which introduces further variability into the real timing. Its all highly unscientific measurement by two guys on the internet (you and me) and completely inconclusive.

    Let's say it really is 10s or 12s. So, in a vacuum, it would take 9s for anything to fall from that height. Fine. Who's to say 10s or 12s, isn't a reasonable 'delay' accounting for the structural resistance? We both agree the fastest it can fall is governed by its air resistance and terminal velocity. What we're arguing over is how much the lower floors and collapsing structure should have further slowed it's fall. You think that the collapsing structure should have slowed its fall more, hence it must have been controlled demolition. We're both doing this in a completely qualitative way with no calculations or proof of any kind. No one has proved anything. There is no undeniable proof. I could just as easily say, if I look at the video, that it doesn't look like an object in free-fall, it looks like an object being slowed as I would expect by the structural resistance of the collapsing floors.

    Since pulling off such a large conspiracy and keeping it secret is so far fetched, the bar for proof is high and the onus to provide real evidence is on you. Unless you have A) an accurate way to measure the time of fall of the building to the bottom, and B) some actual calculations to show that its faster than expected due to structural resistance, based on real-world empirical data from similarly modeled mocked-up trials, computer simulation . . .

    If you can't provide that, then I have seen all these points before and I'm still not buying it. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

    Good luck in your quest. We live in irreconcilable worlds my friend.

  42. #42
    Weird huh?
    Reputation: cmdrpiffle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,283
    I for one, welcome our new Duck Overlords...

    El Cid is Spanish for The Cid..
    cmdrpiffle 7 points 1 day ago
    Cinco de Mayo is Spanish for Cinco de Mayo

  43. #43
    High Desert MTBer
    Reputation: rockerc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5,461
    Quote Originally Posted by cmdrpiffle View Post
    I for one, welcome our new Duck Overlords...
    ...Where freedom of speech is just a quack in the wind...
    It's all Here. Now.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,365

    America is exceptional

    Quack Quack

  45. #45
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Please stand away from the drugs. ^^^^
    A conspiracy you buy into that sh!t. We were attacked by terrorists. Many people lost their lives. Have some focking respect for the families involved.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    According to the official government report on the attacks, it took 10 seconds for the towers to fall (bottom of page 305). Now I'll admit that this report wasn't focusing on the technicals of the collapse itself, but on the supposed motives behind it, so they weren't being very careful in what they said. But still, they said 10 seconds.

    According to the NIST who did the official technical investigation, they say that it took 15 to 25 seconds for the lower floors to completely collapse (Item 11), seemingly contradicting themselves in the same paragraph by alleging that video evidence suggests that the buildings stood for that long, and then in the next sentence alleging that video evidence is inconclusive because of the dust cloud. Well, I saw the video, I know what I saw, and they could not have doctored any footage to that extent! And if they did doctor the footage, then that proves that there was a cover-up of something.

    And they actually reject the pancake theory (Items 6 and 8). They propose some kind of a bowing floors theory which weakened the supporting columns. Yeah right, I see no evidence of any such structural stress in any of the floors beneath the plane impact (in fact, I see no evidence of any problems whatsoever with the floors beneath the impact zone, up until the collapse starts and you see the curious flashes of light in various places that precede the falling wave of debris by a few floors -- flashes of light that look exactly like the detonation charges you see in Proctor's earlier youtube video showing examples of real demolitions). And how would bowing floors weaken the central column, <i>all the way to the ground, in floors that weren't even on fire?</i>

    Oh well, it didn't need to weaken the central column all the way to the ground, apparently, because the wave of falling stuff coming from above was just so large that it overwhelmed everything in its path.... Yeah right, maybe unconsolidated material from a volcano might have this effect, but the central columns are designed to be vertically strong. They will resist forces coming at them from above.

    From Item 9: "the momentum ... of the 12 to 28 stories ... falling on the supporting structure below ... so greatly exceeded the strength capacity of the structure below that it ... was unable to stop or <i>even to slow the falling mass</i>." (my emphasis)

    Umm, no. Sorry, NIST, but if an engineer in your employ wrote that then they should be fired and stripped of their professional status. If this is the kind of standard that your investigation was based on, then the whole thing is a piece of sh!t. What you just said, NIST, violates the laws of physics. ANYTHING that impedes a falling object's trajectory will slow it down; it doesn't matter how large the falling mass of debris is; it will be slowed down when it encounters "stuff" beneath it. Your statement sounds like the kind of technical analysis we get in Hollywood movies, which seems to be the kind of effect the demolition experts behind the attacks were going for.

    Regardless of whether it fell in 10 seconds, 15, or 25, there is no way it should have occurred that fast. Nope, not in a million years. I can't provide any hard specific calculations in the space of this post, but I know for a fact that it takes a LOT of energy to break though 90 floors of completely sound structural steel, glass and concrete. Whether it collapsed in 10 s or 20 s is irrelevant, because based on the energy required to wreck all that incredibly strong material, it would have had to take hours. I'm interested in order of magnitude analysis here. Exact calculations are not needed.

    If it is that easy to demolish a building in a regular demolition, all they'd have to do is start kerosene fires in the upper levels; why even bother with explosives. And you don't even need to fly a plane into it either (Building 7) -- just throw some debris at it, and then magically, hours later, all of a sudden, the whole thing, from one side to the other, will all at the same time just instantly collapse. GIVE ME A BREAK.

    YES, DJ, terrorists did take down these buildings; the question is: who were they?
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  47. #47
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Spaceships

    And

    Jet fuel
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  48. #48
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Well, I don't know anything about engineering, but the method or explanation of collapse you describe above Mark, is identical in some aspects to the way the martial art "masters" break stacks of concrete paver blocks that are higher than they are tall.

    Of course, the pavers are heated in a kiln after purchase, and after a thick stripe of industrial-strength vinegar is painted across them. Then, these treated bricks, which show no visible sign whatsoever of being weakened are stacked with spacers between each one until they form an impressively tall brick-stack. The space is usually one bricks' thickness.
    Then, the "master" climbs up on a platform of some kind that puts the top brick at waist height, and really all he has to do is to break the top brick, maybe the top two, with his elbow, hammer fist, whatever. The weight of those top couple bricks traveling down right onto the treated surface of the ones below them, combined with the space between to provide a little acceleration room, just breaks the entire stack, all the way down.

    Lots of dust, noise, very impressive. And very fraudulent. They do the same thing with ice, but a different process makes invisible fault-planes in the middle of the big blocks.

    Very few of these "masters" could break one single red brick, and fewer still could break one sitting flat on the ground.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Yes. They have to pre-weaken the bricks to break them (which was done at WTC by igniting thermate on the columns, according to the official conspiracy theory The thermate is indicated by all the barium and sulphur residues in the rubble.

    But concrete itself is brittle. It fails catastrophically once it cracks, which is why concrete used in construction has steel rebar all through it. I'm sure we've all seen demolished rebar'red concrete and it does not easily break apart.

    Also, steel structures bend before they break -- they are designed to do this (which is why the Titanic sank, because they were using inferior brittle steel with high sulphur content). The energy needed to bend the steel would slow the falling structure for much longer than a few seconds!
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  50. #50
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823

    Re: America is exceptional


  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,033
    Is this really a thread about whether or not the US government brought down the Twin Towers? Oh boy :0(

    Here's a man who knows how to deal with conspiracy nuts. Hat's off Buzz:


  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Actually one calculation that could be fairly easily done would be to calculate the entire gravitational energy contained within all the mass of the building, being elevated all the way up to 400 m. Energy = mass x height x gravitational constant. Get the mass of the whole building, divide by how many floors there were, and then for each floor calculate how much energy was stored as a result of hoisting it up to its height. Then compare this to the amount of energy that would be required to break through 90 floor structures. I bet there isn't even that much gravitational energy contained within the entire building.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,193
    Sure there might not be enough gravitational energy, but one must not forget about stray neutrinos or graviton waves.
    But if you ignore those two, you still have to factor in the ASSYMETRICAL TETRYON PHENOMENON and TEMPORAL PLASMA DOMAIN in which the ASSYMETRICAL ARTIFICIAL MATRIX in the concrete will have to deal with.
    When the planes were about to hit the ATMOSPHERIC NADION VARIANCE could have helped the terrorists guide the plane towards both buildings.

    The reason some camera did not capture the planes hitting the buildings was due to PHOTONIC E-M INTERFERENCE on the lenses of the cameras causing a RAPID TETRYON FIELD buildup.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by the-one1 View Post
    Sure there might not be enough gravitational energy, but one must not forget about stray neutrinos or graviton waves.
    But if you ignore those two, you still have to factor in the ASSYMETRICAL TETRYON PHENOMENON and TEMPORAL PLASMA DOMAIN in which the ASSYMETRICAL ARTIFICIAL MATRIX in the concrete will have to deal with.
    When the planes were about to hit the ATMOSPHERIC NADION VARIANCE could have helped the terrorists guide the plane towards both buildings.

    The reason some camera did not capture the planes hitting the buildings was due to PHOTONIC E-M INTERFERENCE on the lenses of the cameras causing a RAPID TETRYON FIELD buildup.
    mmm, Treknobabble!
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  55. #55
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Do you guys really think that the best engineers and other field professionals in the world haven't gone over every aspect of this.

    The facts: Terrorists were among us for years and learned how to fly jet airplanes from "us". They then planned out for several years how to do a mass high jacking all simultaneously. They then flew these highjacked jets into certain targets. Two of which were the twin towers. The jet fuel spilled down and melted the structure. All the time the weight of the upper floors came down on the melted floors. The whole building / s then came down upon itself.

    Or you can be brainwashed into numerous conspiracy theories out there which seems to be the case with some of you.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  56. #56
    Weird huh?
    Reputation: cmdrpiffle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    Procter:

    1) I never said hijackings aren't possible. But I don't believe these guys who were terrible at flying planes could possibly perform the maneuvers they did though.

    2) I don't know much about that 4th plane that hit the field but I would presume it's all fabricated like the others. (I'm not implying that a plane didn't hit the towers; I don't know, but the circumstance of those impacts are fabricated).

    3) I don't know, maybe the FBI had orders to let the 1993 bombings happen, since it has the desired effect of whipping up xenophobia. I'm not sure how far the conspiracy goes or whether those previous bombings were conspiracy; I don't have all the answers, but I do know that those buildings did not fall from a plane impact. This then opens up a whole world of exploration. It's all very interesting when one opens oneself up to the reality that things are not what they are presented as. And those guys were actually trained in numerous secret service / military institutions beforehand, so it's not like they just hopped on a plane from Saudi Arabia and came out of the blue.

    4) Interesting, because a few months before the attacks, Rumsfeld changed the air emergency response protocol. He removed the "fast" protocol which is the one that authorizes a pilot to pursue and shoot down such an aircraft on his own accord, and left only the "slow" response that requires the pilot to get clearance from the government to shoot down a plane. Shortly afterwards they re-introduced the fast response protocol. The testimony from air traffic controllers in the area, that I've seen, doesn't corroborate what you are saying. I find it very hard to believe that in this most heavily guarded airspace in the world, surrounding the most heavily protected buildings in the world, that these hijackers could have gotten away with what they did. Air traffic controllers didn't lose the planes; the planes were giving off signals that were from military transponders. As a result they don't order them to be shot down; only non-military aircraft trigger this response.

    5) As an engineer, still interested to hear your thoughts on my technical critique of the impossibility of the buildings falling that way (I've since gone to the footage and confirmed that they did indeed fall in about 10 seconds -- basically freefall speed). You can go to this website which calculates that from 400 m it would take 9 seconds for a ball to hit the ground free falling.

    The Splat Calculator - A Free Fall Calculator

    As a now former Air Traffic Controller, KZOA ARTCC, (Oakland Center ) and law enforcement first responder, I find your musings pathetic, your 'maths' laughable, and your general entitled attitude to pontificate on something you've obviously got less than a 9 year old's grasp of... sad.
    Stupidity continues to kill in this world. Sad to see it championed.
    Oh, I'm also an engineer, A&E (not civil unfortunately)

    Best regards,
    Mike in Santa Cruz

    El Cid is Spanish for The Cid..
    cmdrpiffle 7 points 1 day ago
    Cinco de Mayo is Spanish for Cinco de Mayo

  57. #57
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Is this really a thread about whether or not the US government brought down the Twin Towers? Oh boy :0(

    Here's a man who knows how to deal with conspiracy nuts. Hat's off Buzz:

    Well, that WAS good. And while I don't entirely condone Mr. Aldrin's resorting to the punch, I think most of us can identify with his frustration.

    And while I do think Victor Davis Hanson is likely a shill, and an articulate one, well paid at that, for the corporate-funded neocon view of things, what he says in that clip about talking to conspiracy theorists, is spot-on.

  58. #58
    ****** to the dirt
    Reputation: deke505's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5,122
    Quote Originally Posted by cmdrpiffle View Post
    I for one, welcome our new Duck Overlords...
    all hail our new over lord

    Name:  duck.jpg
Views: 133
Size:  11.9 KB
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    There's some strange folk out there 'bouts. They have no sense of humor.
    My Blog

  59. #59
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    Actually one calculation that could be fairly easily done would be to calculate the entire gravitational energy contained within all the mass of the building, being elevated all the way up to 400 m. Energy = mass x height x gravitational constant. Get the mass of the whole building, divide by how many floors there were, and then for each floor calculate how much energy was stored as a result of hoisting it up to its height. Then compare this to the amount of energy that would be required to break through 90 floor structures. I bet there isn't even that much gravitational energy contained within the entire building.
    Ok do it then. Show the calcs. How are you estimating the mass of the upper floors? How are you deriving the amount of energy needed to break through the lower floors? Are you assuming that structural columns below the are experiencing purely vertical forces? Because, after the top 10 floors start to fall downward, all the regular static, vertical column support calculations go out the window. If the top 10-20 floors of the building are in the process of falling onto the lower structure, then the column structures below the falling portion of the building will experience a lot of non-vertical forces, which they were not intended to hold.

    You're an ME, we've both taken the same courses. Go back to your Statics courses and Mechanics of Materials courses. You know that a horizontal deflection in a vertical column supporting a large weight quickly leads to column failure. Under the weight of 10-20 floors falling, WTC's inner column structures could easily fail like a banana unpeeling or like a zipper unzipping all the way down as the upper floors crash through them. If you disagree, show calculations that account for the horizontal stress vectors put on the structure as this happens.

    You can't do it - your argument is completely qualitative pseudo science with no real quantitative analysis or modeling of the failure. You throw in jargon like 'Newtonian Kinematics' (also known as physics, since we're not dealing with relativistic effects) to make your argument look more sophisticated but there's no data or calcs to back it up. If you want to convince people that hundreds, potentially a thousand people pulled off the greatest conspiracy ever and kept it secret for 10 years, show something with real numbers, don't just assert something. The burden of proof is on you.

  60. #60
    Weird huh?
    Reputation: cmdrpiffle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,283
    Quote Originally Posted by deke505 View Post
    all hail our new over lord

    Name:  duck.jpg
Views: 133
Size:  11.9 KB
    Howard!!!

    El Cid is Spanish for The Cid..
    cmdrpiffle 7 points 1 day ago
    Cinco de Mayo is Spanish for Cinco de Mayo

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Old Ray View Post
    I don't entirely condone Mr. Aldrin's resorting to the punch, I think most of us can identify with his frustration.
    I think the point is that you can't reason with unreasonable people. Sometimes a smack in the mouth is about as good a response as you can give, and is what they deserve.

    I'm not saying that all conspiracy theories have no foundation but the big ones, like 9/11 or the moon landings, are so far out there that they can only be held by people who are mentally deficient in some way. While not fully retarded, they are missing at least some elements of reasoning ability. They are so blinkered in their belief that there has to be an elephant in the room that they ignore all evidence pointing to the impossibility of getting said pachyderm in the lift or through the doors!

    The moon landings and 9/11 could not be staged because the logistics involved would be near impossible, the risk of failure unacceptably high and the cost of failure catastrophic. In short, you could never find people smart enough to plan it yet dumb enough to try it!

  62. #62
    nvphatty
    Guest
    mark_bc your a disgrace to humanity.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    I'm not saying that all conspiracy theories have no foundation but the big ones, like 9/11 or the moon landings, are so far out there that they can only be held by people who are mentally deficient in some way.
    I agree, some conspiracy theories are wrong -- chemtrails is one example, and that they didn't go to the moon. A physicist blogger I follow used to work for NASA and has spent years working on experiments using reflected light from mirrors placed on the moon surface.

    Quote Originally Posted by cmdrpiffle
    As a now former Air Traffic Controller, KZOA ARTCC, (Oakland Center ) and law enforcement first responder, I find your musings pathetic, your 'maths' laughable, and your general entitled attitude to pontificate on something you've obviously got less than a 9 year old's grasp of... sad.
    Stupidity continues to kill in this world. Sad to see it championed.
    Oh, I'm also an engineer, A&E (not civil unfortunately)
    Huh? My maths laughable? Where is your analysis refuting mine? I have provided "basic Newtonian kinematics" to support mine, and no, I was not using those words to make it sound fancy as Procter is suggesting; I was saying that to make it sound simple. The equation for an object starting from rest is distance = 1/2 acceleration * time^2. Instead of writing that out I provided a link to an online calculator that does the calculation for you which shows that the freefall speed is virtually the same as what the towers collapsed in.

    Maybe your violent reaction to what I am saying is your emotional coping mechanism to tune out those pointing out things you don't want to face. And BTW, there are a lot of air traffic controllers and pilots championing the 9/11 conspiracy cause.

    Now, there's some resistance to the observation that the building freefell because presumably what was happening in the bottom floors is obscured by smoke. OK then, let's insead just focus on the upper 2/3 of the building. Look at the footage again and you will see that it falls at freefall. You can pretty accurately estimate this if you were to continue the observed trajectory of the falling upper building and estimate how long it would take to hit ground -- I get 10 seconds. This shows that the upper building freefell, which leaves no room for any kind of unzipping or column buckling or any of that -- it instantaneously lost structural support down its entire length as it was falling.

    Buildings do not unzip like you are suggesting. The onus is on you to provide one example from history of a building like this falling that way. Here, we have two doing it in sequence, followed by a very suspicious third demolition. There must be lots of examples from WW2. And even if they did fall that way, it would require a lot of energy and force to do so, which would substantially dencrease the fall speed, which I have pointed out was freefall.

    And can someone please explain to me how Building 7 collapsed the way it did? Look at the footage, from multiple angles. I see no major structural problems there. I hardly see any damage at all in fact. Procter, that looks identical to the intentional demolitions that your earlier youtube video shows. You have to admit that.

    Look at this map of the WTC complex. WTC 7 is the farthest building from WTC 1, except for WTC 4 which was right beside WTC 2. Now notice that in between WTC 1 and WTC 7 is WTC 6. How did it fare? Well look at the shape it was in after WTC 1 fell, which was right beside it. Pretty damn rough. But did it fall, all at once, catastrophically, seemingly from its foundation suddenly collapsing as WTC 7 did? No. They had to go in afterwards and demolish it.

    Yet WTC 7, which was more than twice as far away as WTC 6 was, and was virtually unscathed, fell in a completely different manner. It fell identically to how buildings fall under controlled demolitions. And look at this aerial photo of the site after the carnage. Notice the building to the left of WTC 7? It's the Verizon building, still standing and relatively unscathed. Yet it was closer to WTC 1 than Building 7 was. Huh???

    I admit that the supposedly simple energy calculation I alluded to above is a bit trickier than I originally thought; I wrote that in haste. But I will work on something for you.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  64. #64
    High Desert MTBer
    Reputation: rockerc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5,461
    Whatever engineering hypothesis you wish to believe, the Newtonian Hammer already hit the nail on the head up there ^ already... a few times... the whole chain of events, and the subsequent successful silencing of anyone involved, of which there would have had to have been many thousand, is simply an impossibility. That is the Immovable Post. The Irresistible Force of the foil hatters just ain't much more than a vapid attempt at such.
    It's all Here. Now.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    A little further insight into why some conspiracy theories are true and others aren't. There is a simple and effective way to categorize them -- if the conspiracy supports the existence of a secretive and all-powerful banking financial elite that has taken over the government and wants to control the world via a one-world monetary system, then you can be sure the conspiracy is true. This is why 9/11 is true, the subsequent cover-up is true, NSA spying on your emails is true, how not a single high level banker has been jailed since 2008, that the world's central banks have been printing trillions and trillions of monopoly dollars to prop up the markets is true (that is why the US stock market keeps rising), etc. etc.

    Going to the moon has nothing to do with this, as does chemtrails. And neither do alien spacecraft, which is also not true. Those sightings were actually just aircraft the government was working on in Area 51, and the government planted whacko stories to fuel the flames of alien spacecraft invaders, to take the focus off of their real aircraft being developed. Nothing to do with bankers.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by rockerc View Post
    the subsequent successful silencing of anyone involved, of which there would have had to have been many thousand, is simply an impossibility.
    I don't understand this. There are lots of former government and other insiders coming out and speaking. And I'm sure many more don't because they are threatened. I would suggest that you have created your own wall of silence by automatically slotting anyone who comes out in support of the conspiracy theory into the whacko category. As I said before, there doesn't need to be an impenetrable wall of silence for this to be effective. All that is needed is a complicit media, and people's cognitive dissonance will take care of the rest.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,033
    So, do we need to apologise to Bin Laden?

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    All that is needed is a complicit media
    Oh, is that all?

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha.... :0)

  69. #69
    ****** to the dirt
    Reputation: deke505's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5,122
    Meet the new overlord's wife

    Name:  daisy.jpg
Views: 110
Size:  13.7 KB
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    There's some strange folk out there 'bouts. They have no sense of humor.
    My Blog

  70. #70
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post


    And can someone please explain to me how Building 7 collapsed the way it did? Look at the footage, from multiple angles. I see no major structural problems there. I hardly see any damage at all in fact. Procter, that looks identical to the intentional demolitions that your earlier youtube video shows. You have to admit that.

    Look at this map of the WTC complex. WTC 7 is the farthest building from WTC 1, except for WTC 4 which was right beside WTC 2. Now notice that in between WTC 1 and WTC 7 is WTC 6. How did it fare? Well look at the shape it was in after WTC 1 fell, which was right beside it. Pretty damn rough. But did it fall, all at once, catastrophically, seemingly from its foundation suddenly collapsing as WTC 7 did? No. They had to go in afterwards and demolish it.

    Yet WTC 7, which was more than twice as far away as WTC 6 was, and was virtually unscathed, fell in a completely different manner. It fell identically to how buildings fall under controlled demolitions. And look at this aerial photo of the site after the carnage. Notice the building to the left of WTC 7? It's the Verizon building, still standing and relatively unscathed. Yet it was closer to WTC 1 than Building 7 was. Huh???
    The NIST studied that extensively and published an extensive report and video on WTC7. True large steel building has collapsed from fire, but firefighters fought the fire in those other buildings. 7 Hours burn time, unhindered by sprinklers or active fire-fighting, is also unprecedented. Showing the WTC6 / WTC7 orientation from the air does not illustrate the fact that WTC7 was much higher than WTC 6, at 47 stories. Vertically, it looks like WTC 6 would completely protect WTC from debris but that's a misrepresentation of the reality.

    Also note that they make their case with real data, you know, engineering calculations, large scale computer simulations of the stresses on each load bearing member, etc.

    If you're right, I guess you can add 10's of NIST engineers and researchers to your conspiracy list (and for that matter 10's or perhaps hundreds more on the 9/11 commission). Man, it must be very lucrative to be on one of these investigation teams and suppress all this evidence of controlled demolition. Must take a lot of money to keep all these folks quiet. Were they brought into the conspiracy before or after 9/11?

  71. #71
    A waste of time it is is
    Reputation: emu26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,451

    America is exceptional

    at turning healthy food in to crappy food.

    Corn dog, corn, a great grain and a staple of many a culture give it to you guys and....mmm just one bite away from a heart attack.

    Now as for the duck thing, I finally get it but now you're cannibals, Turducken. Oops back on the healthy food to crap again.


  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Procter, oh please! Come on man, I have respected your impartiality up until this point but you actually believe that part in the video when they said that they have discovered a totally new type of building collapse! This is the first time it's ever happened! What a fortunate coincidence! It must be so exciting, like finding a new species of rhinoceros in the Indonesian rainforests. It's the <i>"Fire Induced Progressive Collapse"!!!!!</i> Wow! And all that had to happen was for some debris to hit it, some fires to rage for 7 hours, and the sprinklers to get cut off. Yes, that is definitely an exceptionally rare occurrence in a fire disaster! lol I can't imagine that fire would have been a factor in ANY prior building failure, right? No engineer has EVER studied the impacts of fires on steel buildings before!!!

    But wait, don't fires need fuel? How could a fire rage in one spot for 7 hours? Wouldn't they burn themselves out and move somewhere else, and then cool somewhat? If these fires were so infernal, why were a whopping TEN windows broken out of the entire lee side of the building? Where was the smoke billowing out of those broken windows form these infernos raging inside? I can't see ANY smoke emanating from the entire two sides of the building seen on the footage. Granted, it is the lee side, but for the building to fall as suggested by NIST, there would have had to be some pretty major external activity happening all over the place.

    And they expect me to believe that the internal structures failed because the members heated up and expanded and then somehow just popped out of their "connections", causing the structure to fail? What?!?!? That definitely is a new one.

    Look at the video of it falling. It looks EXACTLY like a controlled demolition. In fact, it doesn't look like the very simulation NIST shows in the video, with the building sides crumbling inwards. The building sides didn't do anything. They went straight down, because the foundations had been destroyed.

    Are you really sure there were 10 NIST engineers and researchers involved? How can you be so sure they weren't just made up and only a couple people like that Shyam Sunder and his computer animator made it all up? If you were offered a million dollars would you do it? I wouldn't but I am sure many would. And I like the title on the computer screen animation at 1:30 in the video: "Physics-Based Visualization of WTC 7 Collapse Initiation". Yes, that's I'm sure what simulators would call their various runs. That wouldn't have been made up for general public consumption, would it? I mean, it's "physics-based" so it must be good. I bet it has electrolytes in it too!

    Do this for me. Go watch intensely your previous Youtube video showing controlled demolitions. Then watch the footage of Building 7 falling and in good conscience come back and tell me that it does not look IDENTICAL. And if you still maintain that even though it does indeed look identical to a controlled demolition, it wasn't actually because instead they have discovered a totally new form of building failure that has occurred once only in the history of the world at the WTC site, well then I think we can pretty much end the discussion now.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  73. #73
    High Desert MTBer
    Reputation: rockerc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5,461
    Quote Originally Posted by emu26 View Post
    at turning healthy food in to crappy food.

    Corn dog, corn, a great grain and a staple of many a culture give it to you guys and....mmm just one bite away from a heart attack.

    Now as for the duck thing, I finally get it but now you're cannibals, Turducken. Oops back on the healthy food to crap again.

    Heheh! I just watched an episode of the Simpsons at my father in law's house, something I do not often do, and I could not believe the commercials. Interminable ads for crap food sold with half naked women, and cheap mortgages you can buy online... we just don't learn!
    It's all Here. Now.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    I just reviewed the pdf NIST report you link to. They dedicate 2 pages (pp. 53 to 55) to discussing the structural causes of the collapse. Not a single calculation was provided.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  75. #75
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    It must be so exciting, like finding a new species of rhinoceros in the Indonesian rainforests. It's the <i>"Fire Induced Progressive Collapse"!!!!!</i> Wow! And all that had to happen was for some debris to hit it, some fires to rage for 7 hours, and the sprinklers to get cut off.
    Argument goes both ways. The same is true for your conspiracy theory. Actually, frankly the truth is much more boring. If I wanted to be excited I'd allow myself to believe that hundreds of people across the US Gov, FBI, CIA, Air Force, NTSA, NIST, FAA all conspired to set up, then cover up, a controlled demolition of the WTC and Pentagon, and kept it secret for 10 years, all to stir up military industrial spending and precipitate a trillion dollar war. You think a hundred page engineering report on structural failure of a building is more exciting than that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    But wait, don't fires need fuel? How could a fire rage in one spot for 7 hours? Wouldn't they burn themselves out and move somewhere else, and then cool somewhat? If these fires were so infernal, why were a whopping TEN windows broken out of the entire lee side of the building?
    I dunno, not a fire expert. Are you? Research and write a report comparable in detail to the NIST one with your counterargument, using real engineering justification.

    Where was the smoke billowing out of those broken windows form these infernos raging inside? I can't see ANY smoke emanating from the entire two sides of the building seen on the footage. Granted, it is the lee side, but for the building to fall as suggested by NIST, there would have had to be some pretty major external activity happening all over the place.
    You're looking at footage from the north. Google "WTC 7 from south" and you'll find fire and damage, like this one:



    And they expect me to believe that the internal structures failed because the members heated up and expanded and then somehow just popped out of their "connections", causing the structure to fail? What?!?!? That definitely is a new one.
    Look at the detailed report. There's 20 pages on the exact mode of failure. Its all there for anyone to scrutinize and publish refutations. I'm not pretending I could legitimately scrutinize the detail. You're not providing any real calculations to refute it, or substantiate anything you've said at all. If its wrong, why aren't civil engineers all over the ASCE coming out in opposition? Many CE's would love to make a name for themselves by finding errors and raising questions on the conclusions. Where are they?

    Again, if you have real calculations, simulations, evidence, produce a comparably detailed counter report and get it published to a peer reviewed engineering journal. Not even that, just get a LETTER published to a scientific journal about it. Find some calcs which are wrong, and formulate a meaningful counter-argument which withstands peer review by practicing CE's. The world is your oyster.

    The burden of proof is on you, to produce something comparably researched which withstands the scrutiny of experts in the field. Otherwise your just another anonymous guy on the internet.

    Look at the video of it falling. It looks EXACTLY like a controlled demolition.
    ... Or the top half and north side of a building which collapsed due to structural failure on the middle/lower south side. People see what they want to see.


    Are you really sure there were 10 NIST engineers and researchers involved? How can you be so sure they weren't just made up and only a couple people like that Shyam Sunder and his computer animator made it all up? If you were offered a million dollars would you do it? I wouldn't but I am sure many would.
    Look at the detailed report. There are 10 pages of contributors. Looks like over 100. The first page has 80 names. I guess all those people let their name be stamped on a report they didn't read, at the expense of their reputation.

    Shyam Sunder got a million? Wow, public service is really paying up these days. Yes he got paid. No expert who gets paid can be trusted, because they got paid? How much money are all the 9/11 conspiracy authors and movie-makers making from all their books, blogging, youtube ad revenue and speaking fees? Blogging alone can make you $10K - $50K pretty easily. Nice little side job just for spending a few hours a week regurgitating and recycling endless pseudo scientific qualitative conjecture to an audience who wants to believe that there's a massive coverup.

    And I like the title on the computer screen animation at 1:30 in the video: "Physics-Based Visualization of WTC 7 Collapse Initiation". Yes, that's I'm sure what simulators would call their various runs. That wouldn't have been made up for general public consumption, would it? I mean, it's "physics-based" so it must be good. I bet it has electrolytes in it too!
    You're paper-tigering the video. Look at the detailed report.

    Do this for me. Go watch intensely your previous Youtube video showing controlled demolitions. Then watch the footage of Building 7 falling and in good conscience come back and tell me that it does not look IDENTICAL.
    To me, both WTC7 collapse, and real demolition videos, both look consistent with initial catastrophic structural failure of major internal vertical supporting columns of a building. That initial failure could be triggered by different things - demolition, or, as the NIST report shows, extended fire and other factors. Once any building collapses, it collapses. Its a runaway train - vertical supporting members are sufficiently deflected that they experience columnar failure and quickly shift vertical and horizontal stresses onto their neighbors, and so on. The fact that it looks the same doesn't prove anything. Watch this video, at :29 seconds. Was that demolition too?

    Building Collapse Dance party - YouTube

  76. #76
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    This thread gets a giant FAIL
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  77. #77
    heaven help me
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    This thread gets a giant FAIL
    Is that official?

  78. #78
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    This is officially the dumbest thread in the history of mtbr. Its even dumber than the global warming threads. And that's saying something.

    Certified dumbest...
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  79. #79
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Quote Originally Posted by norton55 View Post
    Is that official?
    No but down below is the official board of directors decision.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    This is officially the dumbest thread in the history of mtbr. Its even dumber than the global warming threads. And that's saying something.

    Certified dumbest...

    This just in....
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  80. #80
    Tree Crasher
    Reputation: rockhop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    441
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    I'm Canadian
    Well, there ya go.
    CRAP... I'm in the wrong gear

  81. #81
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    No but down below is the official board of directors decision.
    The Board decrees that this thread should be liquidated as soon as possible.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  82. #82
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    The Board decrees that this thread should be liquidated as soon as possible.
    Nice board and a thumbs up on that request.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails America is exceptional-image.jpg  

    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  83. #83
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,348
    This space intentionally left blank. We apologise for any inconvenience.

  84. #84
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    Nice board and a thumbs up on that request.
    Now that's a nice board.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  85. #85
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    Whoa, kitty got cat scratch fever.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    This is officially the dumbest thread in the history of mtbr.
    As if that could ever be known.

  87. #87
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Slow Danger View Post
    As if that could ever be known.
    We checked with the board and it came back as truthful and as real as a cucumber.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  88. #88
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Slow Danger View Post
    As if that could ever be known.
    Admittedly I'm going out on a limb here but odds are I'm right on this one.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  89. #89
    ****** to the dirt
    Reputation: deke505's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    5,122
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    Admittedly I'm going out on a limb here but odds are I'm right on this one.
    Isn't this the same as the conspiracy thread started awhile ago. doh But yeah it is the dumbest of the dumber of the dumb threads here in the OC.
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    There's some strange folk out there 'bouts. They have no sense of humor.
    My Blog

  90. #90
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by deke505 View Post
    Isn't this the same as the conspiracy thread started awhile ago. doh But yeah it is the dumbest of the dumber of the dumb threads here in the OC.
    I was actually thinking the same thing. This could have just been dumped in there along with the deadly vaccines.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  91. #91
    A waste of time it is is
    Reputation: emu26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,451
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    This is officially the dumbest thread in the history of mtbr. Its even dumber than the global warming threads. And that's saying something.

    Certified dumbest...
    Quote Originally Posted by Slow Danger View Post
    As if that could ever be known.
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    We checked with the board and it came back as truthful and as real as a cucumber.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    Admittedly I'm going out on a limb here but odds are I'm right on this one.
    No, actually it is.

    I just read the NIST (National Internet Stupidty Test) Report and buried in the 100 pages of were two pages that clearly showed your conspiracy theories are correct and this is the dumbest thread ever (but mainly because Americans aren't exceptional at anything)

  92. #92
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823

    Re: America is exceptional

    There was a vaccine thread?! Glad I didn't get pulled into that one, I probably would have lost several hours of my life to that one too.

  93. #93
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by emu26 View Post
    No, actually it is.

    I just read the NIST (National Internet Stupidty Test) Report and buried in the 100 pages of were two pages that clearly showed your conspiracy theories are correct and this is the dumbest thread ever (but mainly because Americans aren't exceptional at anything)
    Aha, I knew it!
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  94. #94
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Quote Originally Posted by emu26 View Post
    No, actually it is.

    I just read the NIST (National Internet Stupidty Test) Report and buried in the 100 pages of were two pages that clearly showed your conspiracy theories are correct and this is the dumbest thread ever (but mainly because Americans aren't exceptional at anything)
    Reading along and it all sounded great until I got to that last part. The knife nicked the back side of my shoulder blade.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  95. #95
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    There was a vaccine thread?! Glad I didn't get pulled into that one, I probably would have lost several hours of my life to that one too.
    Oh yeah Procter. There are all kinds of outlets for the nutjobs here in the OC.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  96. #96
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    Reading along and it all sounded great until I got to that last part. The knife nicked the back side of my shoulder blade.
    Haha, emu just likes to prod us Yanks now and then.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    The WTC attack is an interesting issue, because it's polarized. There is no middle ground. You either believe in the story that a few disorganized yahoos from the Middle East were able to, using box cutters, successfully penetrate the best defense system in the world, requiring multiple monumental blunders in defensive protocol, and perform amazing aeronautical maneuvers, and destroy 3 key banker buildings in ways that had never been seen before in the history of engineering science. Or you believe that the government did it and pulled off an amazing conspiracy of delusion and silence, involving thousands of people, for over 10 years. Basically, the greatest dupe in the history of the world (and as an aside, the main reason it was done was not to start a war in the ME, although that was part of it. It was to provide justification to implement the previously-drafted Patriot Act which strips Americans of their constitutional rights, and also to destroy the 3 buildings that contained the offices of the SEC, FBI, and CIA that held critical evidence revealing the bankers' financial crimes -- all were destroyed).

    I admit, they are both fantastic stories, and either one is difficult to believe. And flipping from one camp to the other is not a trivial matter -- once you go over the hump to the other side the implications are pretty enormous, which is why people resist so much. I did for a while, but then learned all about how the financial system is a total scam, and then the 9/11 conspiracy theory fits perfectly in that.

    I personally cannot reconcile the blatant violations of physics and all known building failure modes that the official story relies upon, never mind the legions of witnesses who are speaking out (look up Rodrigues the janitor who helped people out before the buildings collapsed -- he was personally awarded a national hero medal by Bush after the attacks, but has since completely flipped and is actively debunking the official story). Sorry, but I just cannot believe that the only known example in the history of the world of a building falling according to this new "Fire Induced Progressive Collapse" scenario happened to occur during the WTC attacks, on a building that falls exactly like a demolished building does, and I cannot believe the official explanation of what this entails -- that horizontal members got hot and somehow all simultaneously just popped out of their rivets and bolts, when that has never been observed before. And I am to believe that it only happens to tall buildings, not short ones, which is why it has never been observed before WTC 7 (yeah right...). I don't know how thermally-induced rivet and bolt popping has anything to do with the height of the building, and I've never heard of it before. And BTW, building 7 fell at near freefall speed as well. Since the whole thing fell at once, pretty much symmetrically, then I am to believe that all the rivets and bolts, from one corner of the building to the other, all popped at exactly the same time and caused a near-freefall rate of building collapse... just like the twin towers. Again ... never been observed before outside of the WTC attacks. That video you link to showing the dance party collapse shows that a small part of one floor fell ... and was stopped by the floor beneath it, while the rest of the building remained intact. It is not in any way comparable; it shows nothing.

    And no, I disagree that I need to publish papers in order to legitimately refute it. On a personal note, I was kicked off a big project at work (and am now laid off) because there was a guy there who didn't like what I was saying in front of the national hearings into whether Canada should build a pipeline to the west coast and export oil to China. I was pointing out that N America imports half its oil and production rates have been going down for 40 years despite what the media tells us; questioning why we are committing to sell what we have left to China and exporting it when we should be conserving it.

    My point is that one does not further one's career by speaking out against these things; quite the opposite. Here is a quote from a commenter on youtube that I think explains the situation well.

    "go to pg.45 of NIST's "final report on building 7", and you'll see they admit the building collapses at freefall, which is obviously impossible without explosives. I'm almost done my Beng, and almost none of my profs believe the official story, and I've worked for engineering firms in the summer, and most of the employees think it was a joke. Most of them don't talk about it much though. Engineering firms caan bankrupt a company with a few small mistakes, so clients are superstitious about who they want working on a job..It explains why few go public They won't find a job if they do, and they'd most likely be fired. A lot of engineers just don't care too, or refuse to look at the evidence. Most big corporations profit from the official 911 narrative, so you won't see them pushing the truth. Most of your videos only solidified the conspiracies. An entire face of the tower has all the windows undamaged, while the side with the smoke is proof that the flame was dying from oxygen starvation. You even hear a bang, which sounds like a bomb."

    And like you, I agree that I cannot be a civil, mechanical, and structural engineer all at once and bring up detailed calculations to refute the claims made by NIST, even though they provide no calculations themselves; all they show is pretty pictures. And I do not have to publish papers to successfully refute it. All I need is simple kinematics and the laws of conservation of energy.

    Regarding the hundreds of contributors listed at the beginning of that NIST report, why do you presume that they all have to exist? I could make some random name generator and come up with that list in half an hour. Who is going to question it? And what would they do if they did find out it was fake? Go on Youtube and make a video and thereafter be relegated into whacko-dom? These people are good at making reports. They can pull something official looking together very quickly; all you need is someone with a bit of technical savvy to fill in the technical parts and voila, you have your report. I'm sure many of the high level people in that list are real, but I've never seen a report which lists so many contributors in its beginning; it's almost like they are trying to convince us.

    And if you go on youtube there are lots of videos showing hundreds of witnesses describing bombs going off. But that's on youtube ... so those people must all be crazy.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  98. #98
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  99. #99
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    The WTC attack is an interesting issue, because it's polarized. There is no middle ground. You either believe in the story that a few disorganized yahoos from the Middle East were able to, using box cutters, successfully penetrate the best defense system in the world, requiring multiple monumental blunders in defensive protocol, and perform amazing aeronautical maneuvers, and destroy 3 key banker buildings in ways that had never been seen before in the history of engineering science. Or you believe that the government did it and pulled off an amazing conspiracy of delusion and silence, involving thousands of people, for over 10 years. Basically, the greatest dupe in the history of the world (and as an aside, the main reason it was done was not to start a war in the ME, although that was part of it. It was to provide justification to implement the previously-drafted Patriot Act which strips Americans of their constitutional rights, and also to destroy the 3 buildings that contained the offices of the SEC, FBI, and CIA that held critical evidence revealing the bankers' financial crimes -- all were destroyed).

    I admit, they are both fantastic stories, and either one is difficult to believe. And flipping from one camp to the other is not a trivial matter -- once you go over the hump to the other side the implications are pretty enormous, which is why people resist so much. I did for a while, but then learned all about how the financial system is a total scam, and then the 9/11 conspiracy theory fits perfectly in that.

    I personally cannot reconcile the blatant violations of physics and all known building failure modes that the official story relies upon, never mind the legions of witnesses who are speaking out (look up Rodrigues the janitor who helped people out before the buildings collapsed -- he was personally awarded a national hero medal by Bush after the attacks, but has since completely flipped and is actively debunking the official story). Sorry, but I just cannot believe that the only known example in the history of the world of a building falling according to this new "Fire Induced Progressive Collapse" scenario happened to occur during the WTC attacks, on a building that falls exactly like a demolished building does, and I cannot believe the official explanation of what this entails -- that horizontal members got hot and somehow all simultaneously just popped out of their rivets and bolts, when that has never been observed before. And I am to believe that it only happens to tall buildings, not short ones, which is why it has never been observed before WTC 7 (yeah right...). I don't know how thermally-induced rivet and bolt popping has anything to do with the height of the building, and I've never heard of it before. And BTW, building 7 fell at near freefall speed as well. Since the whole thing fell at once, pretty much symmetrically, then I am to believe that all the rivets and bolts, from one corner of the building to the other, all popped at exactly the same time and caused a near-freefall rate of building collapse... just like the twin towers. Again ... never been observed before outside of the WTC attacks. That video you link to showing the dance party collapse shows that a small part of one floor fell ... and was stopped by the floor beneath it, while the rest of the building remained intact. It is not in any way comparable; it shows nothing.

    And no, I disagree that I need to publish papers in order to legitimately refute it. On a personal note, I was kicked off a big project at work (and am now laid off) because there was a guy there who didn't like what I was saying in front of the national hearings into whether Canada should build a pipeline to the west coast and export oil to China. I was pointing out that N America imports half its oil and production rates have been going down for 40 years despite what the media tells us; questioning why we are committing to sell what we have left to China and exporting it when we should be conserving it.

    My point is that one does not further one's career by speaking out against these things; quite the opposite. Here is a quote from a commenter on youtube that I think explains the situation well.

    "go to pg.45 of NIST's "final report on building 7", and you'll see they admit the building collapses at freefall, which is obviously impossible without explosives. I'm almost done my Beng, and almost none of my profs believe the official story, and I've worked for engineering firms in the summer, and most of the employees think it was a joke. Most of them don't talk about it much though. Engineering firms caan bankrupt a company with a few small mistakes, so clients are superstitious about who they want working on a job..It explains why few go public They won't find a job if they do, and they'd most likely be fired. A lot of engineers just don't care too, or refuse to look at the evidence. Most big corporations profit from the official 911 narrative, so you won't see them pushing the truth. Most of your videos only solidified the conspiracies. An entire face of the tower has all the windows undamaged, while the side with the smoke is proof that the flame was dying from oxygen starvation. You even hear a bang, which sounds like a bomb."

    And like you, I agree that I cannot be a civil, mechanical, and structural engineer all at once and bring up detailed calculations to refute the claims made by NIST, even though they provide no calculations themselves; all they show is pretty pictures. And I do not have to publish papers to successfully refute it. All I need is simple kinematics and the laws of conservation of energy.

    Regarding the hundreds of contributors listed at the beginning of that NIST report, why do you presume that they all have to exist? I could make some random name generator and come up with that list in half an hour. Who is going to question it? And what would they do if they did find out it was fake? Go on Youtube and make a video and thereafter be relegated into whacko-dom? These people are good at making reports. They can pull something official looking together very quickly; all you need is someone with a bit of technical savvy to fill in the technical parts and voila, you have your report. I'm sure many of the high level people in that list are real, but I've never seen a report which lists so many contributors in its beginning; it's almost like they are trying to convince us.

    And if you go on youtube there are lots of videos showing hundreds of witnesses describing bombs going off. But that's on youtube ... so those people must all be crazy.
    Lol, check it out. He just goes on and on and on and on and on... Doesn't miss a beat. Very impressive.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  100. #100
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    I'll have what he's having.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gj988bo2iKM
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  101. #101
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    I'll have what he's having.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gj988bo2iKM
    Trust me, no you don't.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  102. #102
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    Trust me, no you don't.
    I'll have what "she's" having.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  103. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    Lol, check it out. He just goes on and on and on and on and on... Doesn't miss a beat. Very impressive.
    OK, I'm growing tired of this and will move on. No one can refute me, yet I am thrown in the whacko box anyways. That's fine, I never expected to reach anyone. But trust me, you all are in for a major shock at some point in the next year or two when the US dollar dies. It's all related, all part of the same ploy to steal wealth from the American middle class. They have now almost completely succeeded. And BTW, apparently 15% of the population in the US, and much more in other countries, agrees with me.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  104. #104
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    OK, I'm growing tired of this and will move on. No one can refute me, yet I am thrown in the whacko box anyways. That's fine, I never expected to reach anyone. But trust me, you all are in for a major shock at some point in the next year or two when the US dollar dies. It's all related, all part of the same ploy to steal wealth from the American middle class. They have now almost completely succeeded. And BTW, apparently 15% of the population in the US, and much more in other countries, agrees with me.
    OK, count me as part of the 85% that disagrees with you. "No one can refute me" - you're a piece of work. Actually I need a shower now that I've responded to this drivel.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  105. #105
    A waste of time it is is
    Reputation: emu26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,451
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    Haha, emu just likes to prod us Yanks now and then.
    Nothing like a mate giving you a prod from behind every now and then


  106. #106
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Quote Originally Posted by emu26 View Post
    Nothing like a mate giving you a prod from behind every now and then

    Yeah but have a better aim next time.
    A fractured shoulder blade I can do without.
    Last edited by DIRTJUNKIE; 02-26-2015 at 06:29 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  107. #107
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    OK, I'm growing tired of this and will move on. No one can refute me, yet I am thrown in the whacko box anyways. That's fine, I never expected to reach anyone. But trust me, you all are in for a major shock at some point in the next year or two when the US dollar dies. It's all related, all part of the same ploy to steal wealth from the American middle class. They have now almost completely succeeded. And BTW, apparently 15% of the population in the US, and much more in other countries, agrees with me.
    And those 15% ers are all bunkered down in they're bomb shelters.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  108. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    Quote Originally Posted by Mookie View Post
    OK, count me as part of the 85% that disagrees with you. "No one can refute me" - you're a piece of work. Actually I need a shower now that I've responded to this drivel.
    You never refuted me. The best Procter could do was give me some government reports (from the same government that would be responsible for the conspiracy if it were true, so that in itself proves nothing), that alleges that a completely new type of building collapse mechanism had been discovered, never before observed in the history of the world (and that, inexplicably, exactly matches that of a controlled demolition...), except for the buildings in the WTC attacks, and has never been observed since. No very convincing. Anyways, unlike theMeat who keeps his global warming thread going for months, I will not.

    Actually, I plan to head up to NW BC in a couple days and ride my bike over to a remote river and packraft out to Juneau, Alaska. It will take a few weeks. I really hope the weather doesn't close in in the next week or so or I won't be able to ride over the pass.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  109. #109
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    You never refuted me. The best Procter could do was give me some government reports (from the same government that would be responsible for the conspiracy if it were true, so that in itself proves nothing), that alleges that a completely new type of building collapse mechanism had been discovered, never before observed in the history of the world (and that, inexplicably, exactly matches that of a controlled demolition...), except for the buildings in the WTC attacks, and has never been observed since. No very convincing. Anyways, unlike theMeat who keeps his global warming thread going for months, I will not.

    Actually, I plan to head up to NW BC in a couple days and ride my bike over to a remote river and packraft out to Juneau, Alaska. It will take a few weeks. I really hope the weather doesn't close in in the next week or so or I won't be able to ride over the pass.
    You promise? I think you're a conspiracy addict. You'll be back. Mark my words (lol, no pun intended).
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  110. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mark_BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    792
    OK I'm back. But this time for sure.
    All I am saying is give pizza chants

  111. #111
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark_BC View Post
    OK I'm back. But this time for sure.
    Lol.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  112. #112
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by emu26 View Post
    Nothing like a mate giving you a prod from behind every now and then

    Haha, I'm always up for a little prod from behind from one of my mates from down under.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  113. #113
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    35,165
    How do we know when a thread is "officially" done.
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  114. #114
    I didn't do it
    Reputation: Mookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    9,465
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRTJUNKIE View Post
    How do we know when a thread is "officially" done.
    I think we've wrapped things up here.
    Let's eat Ted
    Let's eat, Ted
    Remember, commas save lives

  115. #115
    A waste of time it is is
    Reputation: emu26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,451
    Just let me check the latest NIST study.......

    yep, we're done.

    Now, just what are Americans exceptional at, and that silly ball game played around 4 white bases doesn't count?

  116. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Zomby Woof (MCM700)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,048
    I just happened upon this thread. It seems to be about conspiracy "theories". All I can say about that is they throw out the facts and evidence. And they make up their own lies which has no evidence to prove any of it. And of course all their stories have been debunked easily enough and they still shout CONSPIRACIES! And when it come to 9/11 conspiracies some of them are so absurdly far fetched they're just plain stupid and funny. And they don't even agree with each other because there are so many different ones that they can't all be right. And what they do have in common is that they are all WRONG.

  117. #117
    banned
    Reputation: random walk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,666
    Quote Originally Posted by emu26 View Post
    Now, just what are Americans exceptional at
    Beer.

  118. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Brewtality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    5,740

    America is exceptional

    Quote Originally Posted by random walk View Post
    Beer.
    Meh. The British and Germans were good at beer long before we were.
    Its all Shits and Giggles until somebody Giggles and Shits

  119. #119
    Rabid Lana Fan
    Reputation: net wurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    8,900
    Quote Originally Posted by emu26 View Post

    Now, just what are Americans exceptional at?
    Walking on the Moon?
    rOCktoberfest 2015 pt I here
    rOCktoberfest 2015 pt II here

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-14-2014, 11:18 AM
  2. More Pussification of America
    By trodaq in forum Off Camber (off topic)
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 08-30-2012, 12:46 PM
  3. God Bless America!
    By fiveo in forum The ReCycle Bin
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 09-13-2011, 03:19 PM
  4. Exceptional rebuild deal from Fox
    By Walt Dizzy in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-12-2011, 10:01 AM

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.