9/11 Conspiracies

**kedawa** · 05 Oct 2011, 04:32 PM

The experts are lying! So you must believe the people who know jack shit!

**Shooting Love** · 05 Oct 2011, 04:36 PM

No group of experts have been able to offer a universally agreed upon explanation as to why three steel framed buildings collapsed.

**kedawa** · 05 Oct 2011, 05:09 PM

Read the report. They did exactly that.

**YellerDog** · 05 Oct 2011, 07:47 PM

So you mean super-heated metal supports less weight? Get out of town...

**Fe 26** · 05 Oct 2011, 07:50 PM

Oh man, this thread is about to get horrible. People who don't understand heat transfer properties of materials arguing with people who don't understand heat transfer properties of materials.

**kedawa** · 05 Oct 2011, 07:54 PM

You forgot the best part; someone who doesn't understand much of anything giving them grief.

**Shooting Love** · 05 Oct 2011, 09:39 PM

Originally Posted by YellerDog

So you mean super-heated metal supports less weight? Get out of town...

So why don't all the other similarly constructed skyscrapers collapse when they burn?
Oh, right, because there was jet fuel!
But wait! There was no jet fuel burning at the third collapse.
It was also never explained how jet fuel continually fueled the fire. Didn't the fuel go up in the initial fireball?
So how was the metal super-heated? I don't follow the logic of your snide comment.

The World Trade Centers were known to be likely targets of another terrorist attack.
After the bombing in 1993, it would only seem logical that appropriate officials would have met to discuss what to do in the event of the next attack on the WTC.
I posit that the scenario of a building falling sideways over Manhattan had to have been analyzed. It would then be logical to prepare a contingency plan to avert a tower taking out a whole chunk of Manhattan.

I don't suggest nor believe that the Al Qaeda attacks were an inside job. But I do entertain the possibility that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition.