I used the link that I was given for the video. It's called Loose Change. I watched probably a minute and a half of it and kinda get where they are going with it. I'll watch the full thing later.
1 posted on
04/29/2006 3:40:08 PM PDT by
Blogger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-29 last
To: Blogger
I dug up my reactions from when I watched this video last year:
It's really too lame to merit a point-by-point response, and this is not an exhaustive examination, but here are some of my initial reactions:
1.) The comparison to other high-rise fires (w/ no building collapse) is fallacious. The other fires did not have a ton of jet fuel injected into them.
2.) The video makes a point about the melting point of pure elemental titanium vs. the burning temperature of jet fuel. However, the components being discussed were titanium alloys, not pure titanium, and therefore would have somewhat different melting points. Furthermore, metals can either soften or become brittle at temperatures significantly lower than that at which they actually liquify. For example, here is a text that says titanium melts at 3300 F but rapidly loses strength above only 800 F:
http://www.tpub.com/content/aviation/14018/css/14018_44.htm 3.) The video repeatedly plays a bunch of witnesses using the word "explosion" to describe the collapse of the towers. This is meaningless. The term 'explosion' is here being used to describe the billowing cloud of dust and smoke being expelled from the building as it collapses. I might call it that myself, but that doesn't mean there were internal detonations.
4.) Unlike a planned building implosion, the collapse of the WTC towers clearly propagates *downward* from the point of the airplanes' impact. Controlled demolitions typically take out critical points all along the height of the building so that it falls all at once.
5.) Mixed messages. The video makers clearly want us to believe that these additional explosions were part of the alleged controlled demolition. But it gives *many* different times for these explosions, as early (in one case) as 9 seconds after the plane hit the north tower. Obviously the tower didn't collapse at that point, so why the 'explosion'?
6.) It is ridiculous to assert that the family members of all the hostages who called them on airphones / cell phones would be fooled by this voice-synthesizing nonsense.
7.) The video falsely claims that cell phones don't work at airliner cruising altitudes. This is simply false. In a sense, they work *too* well -- the reason their use is widely prohibited (aside from paranoia about interference w/ airplane instruments) is that in an airplane you're moving at hundreds of miles per hour and you've got direct line-of-sight contact with scores or hundreds of cell towers, and those resources were not designed to deal with that kind of load.
BTW,
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm is useful, too.
40 posted on
04/29/2006 4:45:23 PM PDT by
Sloth
(Archaeologists test for intelligent design all the time.)
To: Blogger
49 posted on
04/29/2006 4:58:19 PM PDT by
Incorrigible
(If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
To: Blogger
The Towers were weakened and collapsed by two hijacked jet passenger planes crashed into them by ISLAMIC TERRORIST IN THE NAME OF ALLAH AND ISLAM killing 2800 people.
Case Closed.
61 posted on
04/29/2006 5:29:39 PM PDT by
Dallas59
To: Blogger
I've been a firefighter for 27 years. I told my cadet class, while we were watching it live, that the tower that was hit lowest was definitely gone, and that the tower hit higher was probably gone about twenty minutes before the first tower collapsed. The collapses were classic pancake collapses. Steel loses strength at around 1500 degrees or so, and fails suddenly. The floors were not designed to handle the impact load of the collapsing floors above.
There are three reasons people claim the towers collapsed because of planted explosions:
1. Stupidity or ignorance.
2. Lots of Arab oil money has gone towards buying off media outlets and creating a silly mythology that exonerates radical Islam of the attacks.
3. Anti-semitism. The Joooos did it fits in with the idiot European and by extension East and Left coast US hatred of Jews.
63 posted on
04/29/2006 5:33:20 PM PDT by
Richard Kimball
(I like to make everyone's day a little more surreal)
To: Blogger
I have read some of that stupid stuff, and that it just what it is . The same idiots believe our President planned the entire thing.
To: Blogger
Reasonable people are entitled to wish that our government had been better prepared and more alert. But those who peddle fantasies that this country encouraged, permitted or actually carried out the attacks are libeling the truth--and disgracing the memories of the thousands who died that day.
|
|
Wish I'd said that. |
73 posted on
04/29/2006 6:08:35 PM PDT by
Fintan
(Somebody has to post stupid & inane comments. May as well be me...)
To: Blogger
Hey Blogger, here is my two cents. I am not a structural engineer and I don't play one on TV, but I have looked at both sides of the conspiracy. The videos look pretty straight forward, a plane hits the tower and eventually it collapses. Both of them to be exact.
The building techniques were not designed to withstand a current commercial air liner AND the the fuel that it carries burning at an ungodly hight temperature.
My background is search and rescue techniques and I had first hand information taught to me immediately following the Murrah Building incident by team members who were on scene. That does not make me an expert and I am not implying that. But, it does help put it into perspective.
I really can't say that the building was an orchestrated event either MIHOP or LIHOP and that is what drives these rumors. The ability to wonder is waht fuels the fire. There is plenty of info to found in the internet, just google it and you'll see.
I do not believe that any government would let it happen on purpose (LIHOP) or make it happen on purpose (MIHOP). That is my opinion and I'll state that clearly. I may be naive, but I can't think of any long term benefit from it. The truth would eventually come out and it would take hundreds or thousands of persons to keep the lid on.
Just my two cents, like I said. I think if the other side of it, the side of the persons behind the conspiracy rumors, if they don't continue to hype it as a conspiracy they don' sell tapes or make money. Sounds to me like the old adage "don't bother me with facts, I'm too busy believing what I want.
K4
To: Blogger
89 posted on
04/29/2006 8:24:28 PM PDT by
bad company
(Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius)
To: Blogger
94 posted on
04/29/2006 9:17:38 PM PDT by
JRios1968
(In memoriam...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-29 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson