I am investigating 9/11 as best I can and keep coming up with little questions of little known or not widely publicized data and was hoping you could help, as well as have any discussions about the information posted.
DEBRI - I would think that if the floors collapsed as the official version states, not only would there be stacked floors at the bottom, but what about squashed desks, water coolers, computers, etc. I haven't heard anything about that other than one emergency worker saying the largest object he found was half of a telephone key pad. Does anybody have any more detailed information about this, and if you do, could you please include your source? Thanks.
BODY PARTS Another but perhaps morbid question...the remains. I heard on the news that searchers found human remains. Does anybody know in what form and how large? I understand that 700 bone fragments were recovered from the top of the Deutchebank, about .5 cm each. I also heard on a few films (911 Mysteries, and a radio phone conversation (I'll find out who) that 1,100 people lost in the collapse have not been identified by DNA. Where are those people? That's a lot of people to be missing. Again, returning to my first question here, wouldn't there be a lot of squashed bodies in the wreckage?
Thanks for any help anybody can offer.
Posts: 98 | Location: Midwest, USA | Registered: 25 May 2006
If you've seen 9/11 Mysteries you've seen the most thoroughgoing and utterly damning refutation of the official collapse theory. I haven't heard about 1,100 undiscovered bodies. Your questions are good ones, and the True Believers have no answers, except "where's my tin foil hat?" and various other ad hominems. The tiny bone fragments on top of the Deutschebank could only have gotten there as the result of huge explosive force, which is not accounted for in the official story. Same with all the pulverized office materials and the concrete.
-------------------------- "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" - Sherlock Holmes
When I heard on the news that more people had been identified from the rubble, I only heard those people referred to as 'remains.' But never exactly what those remains were, and I think that is important to know. Are we talking half body cavities, full bodies (I never heard anything about full bodies), etc.
I heard somewhere (maybe in "Loose Change" and that movie didn't convince me of anything)that there wasn't any DNA evidence found in Shanksville, PA or at the Pentagon. I don't know enough about plane crashes to know if this is significant, but it seems to be.
There sure are a lot of people in this whole tragedy that are unaccounted for, and it's not like this is some remote spot in the middle of nowhere because 'we' had access to the exact location of the incidents.
Posts: 98 | Location: Midwest, USA | Registered: 25 May 2006
I would think that if the floors collapsed as the official version states, not only would there be stacked floors at the bottom, but what about squashed desks, water coolers, computers, etc. I haven't heard anything about that other than one emergency worker saying the largest object he found was half of a telephone key pad.
You are correct. The secret black ops who planted all the bombs also removed every piece of equipment out of the building without anyone knowing. The reason there were still people left in the building was that they were looking for their staplers and wouldn't leave the building without them.
Posts: 27 | Location: USofA | Registered: 24 October 2007
I heard 9-11 never even happened. It was all fabricated in a movie studio. The moon is also made of cheese and it is up to you neocons to prove me otherwise.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
Actually Slab has hit on one of the keys to the discussion. Truthers have assumed the position of pointing out idiosyncracies in the event without ever offering a complete alternate explanation. They say it "must be CD" or "there were no planes", and then don't follow-up with an explanation of how it could have been pulled off. Yet they demand a rigorous indisputable defense of the OGT.
When a true genius enters this world, you will know him by this sign, all the dunces will be in confederacy against him ---Johnathan Swift
Raynjuls- I fail to see how Slabmasters cowardly horseshit is in any way a questioning of the thoroughness of the C.D explanation. Why you give credence to these ad hominem, I aint got nothin but sarcasm, responses is puzzling
Posts: 462 | Location: California | Registered: 24 April 2007
It is cowardly in that it requires him to put no evidence forward, and at the same time he comes up with ridicule that bears no relation to the facts. Sorry to say that I feel all of you whose capabilities on the subject are limited to innuendo are playing a cowardly game. Pee Wee some of your statemnts are slightly different in that you claim the whole subject is too unlikely to be considered. At least answers such as that have some rational process behind them. I do not agree that conclusions about the likelihood of a possible cause of some event, should preclude one from looking at the evidence concerning that event. But at least there is a semblance of logic. This other stuff is just trash talk plain and simple. Further Pee Wee discussion about the air defense response and pre 9-11 intelligece require no belief in a conspiracy theory to discuss those facts. I do feel that you have run away from the question of is it neccesssary to have a conclusion before looking at evidence
Posts: 462 | Location: California | Registered: 24 April 2007
Further Pee Wee discussion about the air defense response and pre 9-11 intelligece require no belief in a conspiracy theory to discuss those facts. I do feel that you have run away from the question of is it neccesssary to have a conclusion before looking at evidence
Matt, I admire your passion. However, it's my experience that whenever conspiracy theorists are presented with evidence of any kind, their paranoia comes up with an alternate explanation to counter the current facts. There is never a "conclusion", only more questions. And the further and further the debunking goes, the more hardened the conspiracy folks become, and the more respect they have for the insidious cleverness of the conspirators.
I've made my own little humorous statement about these threads, and I have no interest in debating anything with you, because there is no fact or conclusion or evidence that will satisfy you. I'm done with this nonsense. A better use of my time would be to break bread with Sawdust and his bride, which by the way I have done and was a delight.
You and Loki and Fulcaneli can figure this out without me, and God bless you, GO FOR IT.
Posts: 1807 | Location: West Michigan | Registered: 23 June 2005
You mean like the force of a couple of airliners flying at 500 MPH?
No. They were flying INTO the buildings, remember? Those same buildings withstood the impact of the planes, as they were designed to do. So the force of impact with the planes is one event, and obviously cannot be the same force that deposited the tiny bone fragments on the top of the Deutschebank building, some 400 feet away. There is also the problem of why are the bone fragments so small? It would take a great explosive force not only to make them that small but to propel them 400 feet from the WTC.
quote:
About a year after the official program to identify victims had ended, more human remains turned up on top of the Deutsche Bank Building, which stands about 400 feet to the south of the location of the former South Tower. 7 According to the Associated Press, more than 300 human bone fragments were recovered from the roof of the 43-story skyscraper as workers removed toxic debris in preparation for a floor-by-floor take-down of the building. Most of the fragments were less then 1/16th inch in length and were found in gravel raked to the sides of the roof of the building.
-------------------------- "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" - Sherlock Holmes
Originally posted by Mattnapa: Raynjuls- I fail to see how Slabmasters cowardly horseshit is in any way a questioning of the thoroughness of the C.D explanation. Why you give credence to these ad hominem, I aint got nothin but sarcasm, responses is puzzling
My point was in reference to the line "it is up to you neocons to prove me otherwise." Whether this is cowardly or horseshit is obviously in the eye of the beholder. Regardless, his response hits the core of the problem with Truthers, they rant and rave about CD or MANY other collapse mechanisms and yet don't offer even a passing nod to how it could be executed. In a parallel thread, we've discussed the number of people it might take to execute CD, and even in that example it presumes unfettered access to the building. Truthers DEMAND answers, but rarely offer any of their own...
When a true genius enters this world, you will know him by this sign, all the dunces will be in confederacy against him ---Johnathan Swift
You mean like the force of a couple of airliners flying at 500 MPH?
No. They were flying INTO the buildings, remember? Those same buildings withstood the impact of the planes, as they were designed to do. So the force of impact with the planes is one event, and obviously cannot be the same force that deposited the tiny bone fragments on the top of the Deutschebank building, some 400 feet away. There is also the problem of why are the bone fragments so small? It would take a great explosive force not only to make them that small but to propel them 400 feet from the WTC.
Then perhaps it was the force of the falling buildings which has been mathematically estimated to be equivalent to a small tactical nuke...
When a true genius enters this world, you will know him by this sign, all the dunces will be in confederacy against him ---Johnathan Swift
Originally posted by Mattnapa: Raynjuls- I fail to see how Slabmasters cowardly horseshit is in any way a questioning of the thoroughness of the C.D explanation. Why you give credence to these ad hominem, I aint got nothin but sarcasm, responses is puzzling
Matt,
ease the stick out of thy ass and take a breath. I only pose the same requirements of those who doubt my scientific conclusions that the moon is (obviously) made of cheese. Gouda, I believe. If you disagree with my in depth truthisms, you must be uneducated, close minded, and unscientific. (Hey, I can do it too! )
Honestly, where in history has a loaded 757 hit a 110 story building at 500mph, slicing through it's interior, weakening the integrity, having dozens of stories above press down on the hollow core building below. How many thousands of tons does gravity have to play with? There are no like circumstances, nor simular structured buildings to make comparison to. Explosives? Proof? there is none. Speculation bordering on the silly and stupid hypothesese of wild imaginations and conspiracy theories. It's funny until you realize some of these nuts are driving on the same roadways that I do.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
Hollow core building? The core wasn't hollow! You are so full of crap. And you conveniently forgot to mention WTC 7. No plane impact, it collapsed, with perfect symmetry, in 6.6 seconds. Try again. But next time do avoid the propaganda like the PBS Nova Why the Towers Fell nonsense. "Hollow core"? that's a good one! You've once again revealed your astonishing level of ignorance. Goddamn, no WONDER you believe the official b.s.
Since when are 47 steel columns "hollow"?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: memory_hole,
-------------------------- "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" - Sherlock Holmes
Raynjuls- Perhaps I do not understand the neocon quote from Slabmaster, so my apologies to you (though I stil don't get it). I try to avoid disparging stuff, but I have had my fill of moonbeams and cheese moons.
Slabmaster- We have had little direct communication here, so I do not owe you any particular disrespect. The cowardly comment is a response to the whole group that has used moonbeams as the focus of their attack, and is not aimed at you in particular. I do find the strategy of innuendo without a responsibilty to have a conversation a cowardly strategy in general, but it probably wasn't fair to single out your comments. And as I admitted to Raynjuls, I apparently missed something in your neocon comment, so partial apologies to you as well
Posts: 462 | Location: California | Registered: 24 April 2007
No problemo with me. I take little to heart with regard to differences on internet boards, especially the sillyness that is trotted out by the conspiracy theorists surrounding 9-11. I have more direct knowledge of the Pentagon attack than the WTC. Our business was involved with the rebuild and when I read peoples goofy "theories" that are beyond far fetched, it makes me wonder what is in the water.
The recent premise or tactic that I disagree with is the idea that if I (conspiracy nut) come up with some whacky theory about anything, it is your responsibility (somehow) to prove my loonyness wrong. It's ass-backwards and.....weird.
Are there unknowns and unanswered questions? sure. It hasn't been done before. There is nothing identical to compare it to. I've been involved in controlled demo and the WTC didn't happen that way.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
Slabmaster- We may have been through this before, but what is your explanation for the very small hole on the Pentagon facade before the collapse? Your surprise that people would have questions about events that have no historical precedent seems equally odd to me. Can you give examples of plane crashes with so little wreckage. It is one thing to not believe the evidence adds up to government involvement, but it is another to believe that these events are not very much out of the ordinary.
Posts: 462 | Location: California | Registered: 24 April 2007
Originally posted by memory_hole: Hollow core building? The core wasn't hollow! You are so full of crap. And you conveniently forgot to mention WTC 7. No plane impact, it collapsed, with perfect symmetry, in 6.6 seconds. Try again. But next time do avoid the propaganda like the PBS Nova Why the Towers Fell nonsense. "Hollow core"? that's a good one! You've once again revealed your astonishing level of ignorance. Goddamn, no WONDER you believe the official b.s.
Since when are 47 steel columns "hollow"?
You'd have to understand how they were built. I suspect you felt the WTC was inpervious for some reason. Oh well. They were one of the first examples of an innovative and efficient structural concept called "tube" restraint. The Sears Towers are a variation called "bundled tube construction" and the idea is based on a minimum of interior columns, with the exterior facade having more numerous exterior perimeter columns. In the case of the WTC, there are no interior columns. Only a central concrete core roughly 60-80 feet square comprised of several vertical voids that house exit stairs, hoistways for the elevators, utility raceways and mechanical chases; and also, significantly, the sprinkler system main lines. The floors were prefabricated broad cellular panels of parallel trusses and main decking that had a light weight concrete topping applied after they were installed. They spanned a distance of roughly 60 feet from the concrete core to the exterior gridwork of columns and horizontal beams.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
Originally posted by Mattnapa: Slabmaster- We may have been through this before, but what is your explanation for the very small hole on the Pentagon facade before the collapse? Your surprise that people would have questions about events that have no historical precedent seems equally odd to me. Can you give examples of plane crashes with so little wreckage. It is one thing to not believe the evidence adds up to government involvement, but it is another to believe that these events are not very much out of the ordinary.
I'm not convinced that the hole was unusually small for the circumstances. Thin skinned aluminum planes at 400+mph hitting heavy concrete isn't something that we (or anyone) has examples of. What do we compare it to? I do know that the columns sheared off at the ground floor were a result of a 757 at high velocity. Columns held up the structure. The smoke damage was heavy from burning materials but mostly from aircraft fuel. It encompassed over 3 million square feet.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
In the case of the WTC, there are no interior columns.
Flat out not true, Slab. Don't know where you're getting your misinformation, but its false. The Twin Towers each had 47 interior columns.
quote:
The building's core housed the elevator and utility shafts, restrooms, three stairwells, and other support spaces. The core in 1 WTC was oriented with the long axis east to west, while that of 2 WTC was oriented north to south. The core of each tower was a rectangular area 87 by 135 feet (27 by 41 m) and contained 47 steel columns running from the bedrock to the top of the tower.[6]
from Wikipedia
-------------------------- "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" - Sherlock Holmes
Center core columns only. External skeleton provides load bearing for the building. Take away several floors of sleleton and guess what. The spire (core columns) did stand for 30 seconds. The building is a tube, not conventional grid reinforced structure with a skin.
I've seen just about every documentary out on 9/11 - from semi-serious to propagandistic from the likes of alex jones and for a while I was really convinced it could only have been done with involvement of the government. The main argument in that area for me is the fact that they're just to incompetent. Unless someone wants to make the argument that this was all a covert coup and what we really saw is the instantiation of a fascist government, I have to keep wondering whether a government as corrupt and incapable as ours would have seriously been able to pull off 9/11 and not have anyone find out about it.
Posts: 7 | Location: South Florida | Registered: 02 September 2007
Discussion Community 
)