Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

From the resources thread - What really happened

  1. Nov 19, 2003 #1

    amp

    User Avatar

    offers very believable assertions about 911, The vids apear to support what is being said, so I ask why does the mainstream media not pick up on that? (To be continued)
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 20, 2003 #2

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Because "believable" doesn't mean "true."
     
  4. Nov 20, 2003 #3

    amp

    User Avatar

    Of course not Russ

    although, the scnerio laid out there is much more plausible than ... the reasons to invade Iraq for instance and there were some items that came out during the hearings involving Oliver North, like plans to cause a diaster in a major US city to sway the populace to a particular administrations agenda, Deja vu?
     
  5. Nov 20, 2003 #4

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Re: Of course not Russ

    Nope.
     
  6. Nov 24, 2003 #5

    amp

    User Avatar

    Continued...

    Quotes from - What really happened site.

    Thermite? Whats that- duhhh ? How did it get in the basement of the WTC buildings? And that last statement eerie, in all those replays of the collapse did the bulidings start pancacking from the top or the bottom? After this much time has passed I don't quite recall also I didn't want to keep being reminded, but now that the shock has mostly subsided I wonder.

    Are they saying there were explosions after the planes? Explosions that might have caused the collaspe? Is that where this 'Thermite' would have been involved?

    Basically, there are hard questions that need to be investigated and because the public is being distracted from them and the investigators are being hampered (by whom or which Admin?) special investigators (or commissions) may need to be invoked. It could all be pointless and a wild goose chase, but for the people whos lives where lost and those who were traumatized (I was only a few blocks away) that day could we, should we do any less?
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2003
  7. Nov 25, 2003 #6

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Re: Continued...

    I think you misread. Nothing in those quotes say thermite was found in the WTC.
    All of the videos that show the collapse show it pancaking top to bottom.
    Yes, that is what they are saying.
    No, there aren't any hard questions. You just need to learn to recognize B.S. when you see it. Most of those quotes are baseless speculation. The rest are in error.
     
  8. Nov 25, 2003 #7
    russ_watters is absolutly correct. What happened to the WTC towers is very simple. The heat from the fires weakened and distorted the steel clips holding the floor trusses to the wall collumns. As soon as enough clips gave way one floor fell onto the one below and it was all over. No mystery there.
     
  9. Nov 25, 2003 #8

    amp

    User Avatar

    Russ, Havoc - So...

    there wasn't anything to the report of an explosion just prior to the collapse or seismic monitors jumping ahead of the initial colapse.

    Can you explain the molten steel in the basements? Was the heat generated from the jet fuel and paper and other materials enough?

    Would thermite residue be found afterwards? Would it even be reported if there were an coverup?
     
  10. Nov 25, 2003 #9
    Actually, there is one simple reason why I don't buy this...

    Bush Co. would have been much more justified in their rolling back civil liberties, and their BS 'war on terra' if there had been thermite in the basement.
     
  11. Nov 26, 2003 #10

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Re: Russ, Havoc - So...

    Depends on how long before. Snapping beams could cause seismic readings and could begin a minute or two before the collapse.
    I've never seen any such report and you can't take anything on that site at face value, so I submit that you likely haven't seen any such report either. If you have, it probably tells how it could happen.
    Could you read that question aloud to yourself a few times please? If you can't answer it yourself (indeed, the question IS the answer) and can't evaluate whether or not its a reasonable question, ask again.
     
  12. Nov 27, 2003 #11
    Definitely crackpot. Buildings collapsed top to bottom, and the other factors mentioned s/a seismic activity can be explained by high kinetics inside the building reported by survivors. And by the way, how could there have been any survivors if the exit floors were blocked by molten steel? Even if it were true that additional explosives were used, it's irrelevant.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?