A leading Japanese politician espouses a 9/11 fantasy

[SMC]

Very good that you realize that. Now think...hard...that why is it that no controlled demolition company in the world stepped forward to support these loony conspiracy theories? After all, what they do is also very 'time consuming' in their trade, correct?

You're seriously kidding me, are you not? Why the hell would a company do that? Why would supporting these conspiracy theories interest them? This is akin to clutching to straws as far as arguing goes.

As far as time consuming goes, I merely meant it's time consuming to reply to these posts. I am not sure if you understood what I meant by that.

YOU who are still in skule is here claiming to know better than they who deals with life threatening substance, aka TNT and the sort, for a living.

I am a university student in an honours program close to graduation. You can't use my age against me. As far as having as these kinds of demolitions not being possible, the article I posted deals with that and while this is now how most of controlled demolitions are done, they are certainly possible to do that.

 

[SMC]

Are you certain that no fire have EVER collapsed a building prior to Sept 11, 2001...???

Fire Protection Engineering Archives - Historical Survey of Multistory Building Collapses Due to Fire

Concrete have better fire resistive behavior than steel and here we have from the firefighters themselves that a 6-story concrete building collapsed from a fire.

I suggest at least one semester of critical thinking course for you.

Again clutching to straws. Look how those collapsed buildings look like. Nothing like WTC. Here you're talking about 3 buildings collapsing in pretty much the same way and for same reason. Building collapsing due to fires is rare, even more rare (or rather impossible) is the way they collapsed. Yes, you're talking about lot of coincidences happening the same day.

 

[gambit]

You're seriously kidding me, are you not? Why the hell would a company do that? Why would supporting these conspiracy theories interest them? This is akin to clutching to straws as far as arguing goes.

Because this would go against their ethics. This is about their profession. The US does not have a monopoly on controlled demolitions of structures in the world. So here you are telling everyone that ALL those who are in the controlled demolition business is either dishonest or was paid off for their silence.

 

[SMC]

You're telling me that kind of demolition isn't possible? Because that argument has been dealt with.

Anyway I am realling running out of time and patience but I will be back.

 

[gambit]

Again clutching to straws. Look how those collapsed buildings look like. Nothing like WTC. Here you're talking about 3 buildings collapsing in pretty much the same way and for same reason. Building collapsing due to fires is rare, even more rare (or rather impossible) is the way they collapsed. Yes, you're talking about lot of coincidences happening the same day.

No...It is YOU who are clutching at straws. The post collapse photos of the area does not indicate the towers fell 'within their own footprints'. The debris field is large and several neighboring buildings were severely structurally damaged. That is not how controlled demolitions usually result. As for your claim as to the rarity of fire induced collapse structures...Sources of said statistics...Please...Whatever 'rare' means.

 

[gambit]

You're telling me that kind of demolition isn't possible? Because that argument has been dealt with.

Anyway I am realling running out of time and patience but I will be back.

What is possible does not equal to probable. In order to collapse both towers, if we take in the CDI collapse of the stadium as a guide, it would have have taken months and thousands of workers to drill and plant the explosives.

But no one noticed...

 

[ptldM3]

And it's the article on popular mechanics that's saying that the there was possibly hijacked planes heading towards DC and Boston (one of those possible hijackings had already crashed).

I don't understand your point, in interviews the air traffic controlers stated they had a hard time finding and thacking the aircraft.

Yeah, and how would you explain the pentagon crash then? Not exactly about steering anymore is it? Moreover, again, small planes differ heavily from bigger ones. Again, it's not like learning how to drive and then driving any car. Totally different.

Not totally different, they are just stearing remember they didn't take off and they didn't land. BTW i also got to fly a large twine engine aircrat and trust me it was no different stearing it than stearing a smaller aircraft.

You're kidding me, are you? This is your debunking? Did you not see loose change where they zoomed into the buildings falling and there were small explosions going off? When that happens, really how it's done becomes irrelevent. It happened and there's videos to show that, how it happened is just a desperate argument.

Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air — along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse — was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - Popular Mechanics

Even the loose change chumps addmited they were wrong about the "explossives."

Moreover, no one is taking about drilling explosives. Hundreds of buildings have been brought down by explosives. You're telling me this one can't be?

Sorry but you need to drill thousands of holes required for the charges, and to do this the workers would need to strip the sheetrock, carpet, and god know what else just to get to the concrete.

There was in fact no wreckage found at the pentagon except small pieces - and a few of them only -, small enough to be easily carried by one person and planted as evidence.

Yea i'm sure this big *** wheel was "carried" into the buring building.

http://img193.imageshack.us/i/ppentagonlandinggear.jpg/

For instance, no engines or wings, etc. Those don't get destroyed as easily. And no, no pictures show plane wreckage at the pentagon.

You might want to double check that.

http://img651.imageshack.us/i/rb211a.jpg/

As far as witness accounts go, there are videos of only 1 or 2 of them. The rest are only words, which means they were made up by GoA. This is contradictory to the conspiracy theorists evidence, which shows visual evidence of bombs going off at the WTC and the sound of them as well in several videos.

Yes, several hundred witnesses are liars right?

Also something important as far as pentagon goes.

They claim they found the black box, yet have never released the data to the public. They confiscated the camera data of every single camera in the surrounding area, and to this date, and only released three frames of animation from ONE of them, and neither of those frames show a plane. Interestingly enough, the three frames they released had been leaked years earlier. If they actually wanted to settle this debate once and for all, they'd simply release all the camera data. If you have nothing to hide, you have reason to hide nothing.

They are not obligated to release anything.

And 9/11was the first time fires apparently destroyed the core support of 3 buildings, contradictory to many other buildings that were on fire. Right? How many firsts happened on 9/11? (And also lasts)

911 was also apparently the first time fully loaded jetliners smashed into building traveling at about 500-600 mph.

I am not talking about melting or anything here. If fire was responsible, I just can't see the building collapsing like the way it did or how quickly it did.

The core support was badly damaged, the fire was strong enough to weaken the vertical columns, when heated to a certain point they will start to stress and bend due to the incredible weight pushing against them, once they do they will start to pull the outer walls-in, obviously there is so much the outer walls can take before they give way.

 

[gambit]

You're kidding me, are you? This is your debunking? Did you not see loose change where they zoomed into the buildings falling and there were small explosions going off?

Next time you are in skule, check with the electrical engineering students and ask them if they know of any industrial capacitor explosions...

Capacitor plague - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When an electrolytic capacitor bursts, effects can range from a pop and a hissing noise to a small explosion.

Especially when they are exposed to a fire. This could account for many of the 'explosions' claimed by loony conspiracy theory believers. Or are you going to tell the readers here that there is no such thing as industrial capacitors in buildings?

 

[SMC]

Man some of the arguments are so desperate I will be having a fun day when I get time to deal with these.

 

[gambit]

Man some of the arguments are so desperate I will be having a fun day when I get time to deal with these.

This is from someone who refuse to admit he was confused between a radar and a radar transponder. Laughable indeed.

 

[SMC]

I am not confused at all einstein. I could not remember the correct term used on the website popular mechanics. I read the article some time back. Stop trying to milk a small thing. The rest of what I said still stands.

 

[gambit]

I am not confused at all einstein.

Of course you are.

I could not remember the correct term used on the website popular mechanics.

But you posted the paragraph containing the words.

I read the article some time back.

Apparently not well enough.

Stop trying to milk a small thing.

It is not a 'small thing'. What you thought to be factual contributed to your flawed understanding of the event.

The rest of what I said still stands.

No...They do not. You have never served in the military, yet you see nothing wrong with declaring the US military is supposed to do this or capable of doing that. You failed to provide a credible source that state without equivocation on what is the alert level any military, not just US, is supposed to be on any given day. You did not know of the distinct separation of US airspace authority and who is subservient to whom and where and how such separation of authority contributed to the confusion on Sept 11, 2001.

:: CAA Pakistan ::

All kinds of Civil Aviation related activities are performed by CAA including the regulatory, air traffic services, airport management, infrastructure and commercial development at the airports, etc.

What make you think that Pakistan DID NOT adopt some of our organizational structures, levels of authority and scope from the American FAA? And what make you think that if some Hindu fanatics decided to do to Pakistan what al-Qaeda did to US, that Pakistani civil aviation authority will perform any better? The US have the world's busiest civil aviation community. So it would make sense to emulate the one with the most experience, correct? So do explain to the readership, since you boasted of your honors graduate program, how could Pakistani civil aviation authority find a few airliners that turned off their transponders among the thousands of targets on any day of the work week. I have news for you, young man, that after Sept 11, 2001, any country that has a civil aviation authority seriously reviewed how effective are their responses to a 9/11 style attack on their soil.

Now here comes the important part:

The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1000 °C -- hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1500 °C."

What is even more important is that the comment is wrong. Under certain conditions, like a jet engine's afterburner, the exhaust flame can and have exceeded the melting point of steel.

How Things Work - Afterburners | Flight Today | Air & Space Magazine

Another challenge is keeping the metal jetpipe cool in the afterburner’s high temperatures, which can reach 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit.

The melting point of steel in F is...

What's the melting point of steel?

Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F).

No one knows for certain if any pockets of fires inside either towers reached that temperature but this example clearly showed that under the right condition, aviation fuel such as JP-4 can burn hot enough to melt steel. These pocket fires does not need to reach that high temperature, just enough to weaken a few support columns to induce a lateral load on the rest.

They confiscated the camera data of every single camera in the surrounding area, and to this date, and only released three frames of animation from ONE of them, and neither of those frames show a plane.

If they actually wanted to settle this debate once and for all, they'd simply release all the camera data. If you have nothing to hide, you have reason to hide nothing.

Here is where your ignorance of technical information fails you -- again. Security cameras have neither the high resolution nor the frame rate necessary to record objects moving at several hundreds km/hr. Distance of said object from camera also matter as distance affects resolution due to depth of field, or lack thereof. Security cameras are usually pointed at areas where there would slow moving objects, like inside a store or pointing at a traffic gate where cars are required to slow down and stop for identification purposes.

Here is a source that will inform you on the differences...

Surveillance Video Frame Rate

Low resolution and low frame rates, as in 10fps or lower, are sufficient for these areas. Security cameras also must record and the higher than 10fps the camera, the greater the storage demand and that cost money. So when we have an object that is outside of the camera's depth-of-field and moving at several hundreds km/h, there is no way to capture any details beyond blurs. Check with the photography dept at your university for details. But then ask yourself the question that why is it that no companies like Nikon, Minolta or Zeiss came forward to support you in this? They are no amateurs when it comes to optics.

Of course, the only argument you can trot out is that the US DoD is so rich that money is available to record ground and sky at cinema resolution.