|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281
Captain Impound Boy
|
Captain Impound Boy
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281 |
the plane had something like 300k pounds of few...
it can't melt a i beam? But it can topple a 111story building X2?
There was no missle and no bombs in the building. One day if its ever declassfied ill inform people of what i saw/read.. And My info came from the The Air Combat Command Commander Via Video conference while traveling to a undisclosed location on Sept 11th
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753 |
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
the plane had something like 300k pounds of few...
it can't melt a i beam? But it can topple a 111story building X2?
It can and did. I'd like to see a comparison between the btu's of the fuel in one of those planes and some common missiles. I'd bet it's more like the btu's in a shock and awe style MOAB.
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
There was no missle and no bombs in the building. One day if its ever declassfied ill inform people of what i saw/read.. And My info came from the The Air Combat Command Commander Via Video conference while traveling to a undisclosed location on Sept 11th
I don't think I'd be out of line in calling bs here.
But really, isn't it your duty to blow the lid off this conspiracy? You could be remembered as one of the greatest Americans. Make sure you mention CEG when you are on 60 minutes. 
Last edited by spgoode; 02/06/06 09:36 PM.
Dueling Duratecs
'95 SE V6 MTX 0 Mods
'04 Mazda6 S Wagon
'03 Kawasaki Z1000
But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037 |
Originally posted by spgoode:
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
the plane had something like 300k pounds of few...
it can't melt a i beam? But it can topple a 111story building X2?
It can and did. I'd like to see a comparison between the btu's of the fuel in one of those planes and some common missiles. I'd bet it's more like the btu's in a shock and awe style MOAB.
Burning fuel and high explosives are apples & oranges. A bomb under combustion doesn't linger and coat, it's a quick and extremely energetic blast and shockwave. Try finding some videos of bombs going off in Iraq...they look NOTHING like the Hollywood fireball, which usually is a visual effect caused by lighting off lots of gasoline. I think there's probably a more valid means of comparing the impact energy of the airplane and what a bomb would release, but in the tower collapses, you've got to factor in a double-whammy effect of a significant shock to the buildings structure at the moment of impact, and *then* the vertical dousing of fuel that was either on fire or soon to be.
"Think of it, if you like, as a librarian with a G-string under the tweed." Clarkson on the Mondeo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489 |
Originally posted by spgoode:
Originally posted by BP:
for all their precision and surprise it's highly unlikely that there wasn't some sort of 'inside' help.
What specifically are you speaking of that would require inside help to pull-off? I know it's sometimes hard to distinguish television from reality but give me a break.
please don't turn this discussion pissy. as i mentioned earlier, no one here knows the whole story. what we do know is that our intel had been tracking the suspected 9/11 terrorists for a while, but for some reason didn't connect the dots. there were various explanations, but we don't know all the details or what happened behind the scenes. please don't act like you know the details because you don't. 'inside help' could have come in many forms. is it completely out of the realm of belief that intel agents could have knowingly or unknowingly passed information that was used against us? ever heard of earl pitts or james smith?
Originally posted by spgoode:
Conspiracy-mongering is counter-productive. It's going to take a lot more than the nonsense in this video to make me think there was any more to 9/11 than was revealed.
that's because you're a person that doesn't care to know more than what you've been told. do you honestly believe the gov has told us the whole story regarding 9/11, the war in iraq, al qaeda, etc? any person in their right mind knows there's more to it than what we've seen on tv or read in the papers. does that mean its a conspiracy? no. all i'm saying is that there's always more to the story than we're told. sometimes it's for a good reason, other times its because someone is covering their ass. personally i'd rather pick through the mess and make up my own mind rather than being told/fed what i should believe. that's all i'm saying.
'03 Saab 9-5 Aero
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753 |
Originally posted by Jeb Hoge:
Originally posted by spgoode:
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
the plane had something like 300k pounds of few...
it can't melt a i beam? But it can topple a 111story building X2?
It can and did. I'd like to see a comparison between the btu's of the fuel in one of those planes and some common missiles. I'd bet it's more like the btu's in a shock and awe style MOAB.
Burning fuel and high explosives are apples & oranges. A bomb under combustion doesn't linger and coat, it's a quick and extremely energetic blast and shockwave. Try finding some videos of bombs going off in Iraq...they look NOTHING like the Hollywood fireball, which usually is a visual effect caused by lighting off lots of gasoline. I think there's probably a more valid means of comparing the impact energy of the airplane and what a bomb would release, but in the tower collapses, you've got to factor in a double-whammy effect of a significant shock to the buildings structure at the moment of impact, and *then* the vertical dousing of fuel that was either on fire or soon to be.
That was my point! The massive amount of jet fuel and absense of insulating foam around the metal is what weakened the structure of the buildings and caused the collapse. They were built to withstand a fire but not one fueled by hundreds of thousands of gallons of kerosene.
Some here are suggesting that this is not possible, but it is absolutely what happened.
Dueling Duratecs
'95 SE V6 MTX 0 Mods
'04 Mazda6 S Wagon
'03 Kawasaki Z1000
But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106 |
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
the plane had something like 300k pounds of few...
it can't melt a i beam? But it can topple a 111story building X2?
There was no missle and no bombs in the building. One day if its ever declassfied ill inform people of what i saw/read.. And My info came from the The Air Combat Command Commander Via Video conference while traveling to a undisclosed location on Sept 11th
I was saying that there's no way that the beam IN THE BASEMENT should have been melted. The plane crashed into the building, dozens of stories up. 
Mark
2000 Black CSVT
3.0L Hybrid - 206fwhp & 195fwtq
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753 |
Oops! Steeda, I think I misunderstood your last post. After I read the first one I got your point. 
Dueling Duratecs
'95 SE V6 MTX 0 Mods
'04 Mazda6 S Wagon
'03 Kawasaki Z1000
But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 753 |
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
the plane had something like 300k pounds of few...
it can't melt a i beam? But it can topple a 111story building X2?
There was no missle and no bombs in the building. One day if its ever declassfied ill inform people of what i saw/read.. And My info came from the The Air Combat Command Commander Via Video conference while traveling to a undisclosed location on Sept 11th
I was saying that there's no way that the beam IN THE BASEMENT should have been melted. The plane crashed into the building, dozens of stories up.
Mark
Where are you getting this information? I don't even see how it's relevant, since the buildings collapsed from the top down and not from the bottom.
Dueling Duratecs
'95 SE V6 MTX 0 Mods
'04 Mazda6 S Wagon
'03 Kawasaki Z1000
But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 6,106 |
Originally posted by spgoode:
Originally posted by Y2KSVT:
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
the plane had something like 300k pounds of few...
it can't melt a i beam? But it can topple a 111story building X2?
There was no missle and no bombs in the building. One day if its ever declassfied ill inform people of what i saw/read.. And My info came from the The Air Combat Command Commander Via Video conference while traveling to a undisclosed location on Sept 11th
I was saying that there's no way that the beam IN THE BASEMENT should have been melted. The plane crashed into the building, dozens of stories up.
Mark
Where are you getting this information? I don't even see how it's relevant, since the buildings collapsed from the top down and not from the bottom.
Well, you're catching on then. I don't know if you watched the video from beginning to end, but it talks about how the beams in the basement, were reported to have been melted in the same corners of every level of the basement. I'm trying to figure out how beams in a basement, 40+ stories below the crash, would have melted! Their reasoning was that a fireball travelled down the elevator shaft. LOL!
Mark
2000 Black CSVT
3.0L Hybrid - 206fwhp & 195fwtq
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281
Captain Impound Boy
|
|
Captain Impound Boy
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 8,281 |
Originally posted by spgoode:
Originally posted by SteedaSVTââ??¢:
There was no missle and no bombs in the building. One day if its ever declassfied ill inform people of what i saw/read.. And My info came from the The Air Combat Command Commander Via Video conference while traveling to a undisclosed location on Sept 11th
I don't think I'd be out of line in calling bs here.
But really, isn't it your duty to blow the lid off this conspiracy? You could be remembered as one of the greatest Americans. Make sure you mention CEG when you are on 60 minutes.
Are you serious? Your calling BS on that?
Do you know what i did in the Air Force? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
IM not some [censored] high school student. I spent 4 years in the USAF, Electronic Warfare on the B-2 Stealth bomber which i did like half of the time, the other half i did a totally different job. I could tell you what kinda clearance i held but like 3 people on this board would get pissed and im not going to say.
Soo [censored] call BS on someone else
|
|
|
|
|
