NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate-

NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events >> Conspiracy Central

Message

RingsofSaturn -> NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/19/2007 10:57:20 PM)
This ones for Danacre and BrooklynBlessed; Official press release from US Govt agency: NIST Proof that the pancake theory is a farce and that issues surround the collapse of the WTCs. It also shows the possible stonewalling or corruption in regards to the WTC 7 which was NOT hit by a plane and did not suffer significant damage...but collapsed free fall speed. This comes from the NIST....a GOVT agency, the same agency scoffers have been using to try to debunk 911 Truth theories.... This is the beginning of the truth...the REAL truth being revealed about 911. http://prisonplanet.com/articles/oct...ist_admits.htm NIST Admits Total Collapse Of Twin Towers Unexplainable The National Institute for Standards and Technology has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down. In a recent letter (PDF link) to 9/11 victim's family representatives Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, NIST states, "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse." A 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC structure to fall through the path of most resistance at freefall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics. In addition, NIST's own studies confirmed that virtually none of the steel in either tower reached temperatures hotter than 500 degrees. The point at which steel weakens is 1000 degrees and melting point is reached at 1,500 degrees, according to NIST itself. EDITED TOS 8 ---------------------------------- Gee....imagine that....[:D]

Dancre -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/20/2007 12:23:56 AM)
I deleted my last post b/c I figured out NIST, I guess it helps to read it. Well, I'll have to see what NIST said. I'm sorry, but I just don't trust these conspiracy articles. I'll have to do some research. And thanks for remembering me. That was nice!! How's your book coming along? kim

EverLearning -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 3:15:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn It also shows the possible stonewalling or corruption in regards to the WTC 7 which was NOT hit by a plane and did not suffer significant damage...but collapsed free fall speed. you keep parroting the no significant damage thing when we have shown you that almost a quarter of the lower portion of the building was gone prior to collapse. that means that there were hundreds of tons of steel and concrete that hung in midair stressing the rest of the structure to unbelievable magnitudes for hours before it finally gave way. Oh and the link doesn't seem to work.

EverLearning -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 3:28:21 AM)
And with just a minutes time your post above is negated as a mischaracterization of what NIST actually said: quote: Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower. Also from that article quote: However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers.

cow451 -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 1:00:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning And with just a minutes time your post above is negated as a mischaracterization of what NIST actually said: quote: Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower. Also from that article quote: However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers. Shucks. I hate facts, don't you?[sm=hammerhead.gif]

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 2:16:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning And with just a minutes time your post above is negated as a mischaracterization of what NIST actually said: quote: Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower. Also from that article quote: However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers. Not even remotely close: This is what was at the top of YOUR article. Note the date... quote: NIST NCSTAR throughout this document refers to one of the 43 volumes that comprise NIST’s final report on the WTC Towers issued in October 2005. All sections of the report listed in this document are available at http://wtc.nist.gov.) What I posted is NEW...its just released. Here's the link again..... Link to article: http://prisonplanet.com/articles/october2007/161007_nist_admits.htm Link to PDF- Govt Doc sent to several key players in the Truth Movement: http://www.911proof.com/NIST.pdf Note section E, where it discloses two key items: 1. Steel did NOT exceed 500 degrees F. 2. They are limited in the materials they have from the WTCs. Why? " Because it was immediately discarded....concrete sent out to sea and Steel sent to China. All of this by Guilianni and company AND Illegal. The investigation is limited because the evidence was illegally distroyed. Gee...I can't imagine why.... Facts ARE facts...the NIST just admitted that their findings were wrong... The plot thickens....

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 2:36:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cow451 quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning And with just a minutes time your post above is negated as a mischaracterization of what NIST actually said: quote: Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower. Also from that article quote: However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers. Shucks. I hate facts, don't you?[sm=hammerhead.gif] Yeah, me too... Here's three good ones... 1. Rumsfeld under direct order from the W. House, changed the engage protocol at NORAD, just 6 months prior to 911. Under the new protocol, NORAD had to seek specific permission from Bush, Cheney or Rummy before engaging any stray or unidenified aircraft. 2. Under Executive Order from the W. House, VP Cheney was given all access to NORAD for the purpose of conducting war games. This, just 6 months before 9/11 and despite opposition from Congress and other key members within the US Govt. This is clearly not the VPs job. 3. On the morning of Sept 11, Cheney was conducting war games at NORAD with simulated drills of airliners being crashed into THE WORLD TRADE CENTERS and various other aviation war games drills in the east. Google: Vigilant Guardian or Northern Vigilance for more info. This is clearly not the VPs job also. But, these are all just silly facts/coincidences, right? Wrong.

EverLearning -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 2:51:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn What I posted is NEW...its just released. Here's the link again..... No what you posted was a website's biased nit picking of quotes from the actual NIST papers that completely ignore the facts. the website you poste grabbed comments out of context. I will take my information on NIST from reading what they actually wrote instead of your quote mined phrases if you don't mind.

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 3:15:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning And with just a minutes time your post above is negated as a mischaracterization of what NIST actually said: quote: Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower. Also from that article quote: However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers.

cow451 -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 3:31:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn What I posted is NEW...its just released. Here's the link again..... No what you posted was a website's biased nit picking of quotes from the actual NIST papers that completely ignore the facts. the website you poste grabbed comments out of context. I will take my information on NIST from reading what they actually wrote instead of your quote mined phrases if you don't mind. The NIST letter was pretty clearly a rebuke of the conspiratorial assertions when read in its entirety.

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 5:56:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cow451 quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn What I posted is NEW...its just released. Here's the link again..... No what you posted was a website's biased nit picking of quotes from the actual NIST papers that completely ignore the facts. the website you poste grabbed comments out of context. I will take my information on NIST from reading what they actually wrote instead of your quote mined phrases if you don't mind. The NIST letter was pretty clearly a rebuke of the conspiratorial assertions when read in its entirety. We'll see. They're being sued for inaccuracies and other failures in regards to the 911 investigation. They've been dragging their feet for 6 years about the collapse of building 7. The 911 Omission report had NOTHING in it as well. But, its all coincidence though....yeah, right.

draexo -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 6:33:41 PM)
Boo! Been busy in other forums. But it is always nice to come back to 9/11. I find it impossible that the steel reached 1000 degrees C. Maybe 1000 degrees F... not C. As for 9/11.... believe what you want. The laws of physics can not be broken except by God Himself. Those towers turned to dust BEFORE they hit the ground. Watch the videos. The top section of the one tower starts to fall and then VAPORIZES. If the towers had pancaked, there would have been floors stacked upon floors of broken steel and concrete. Not mostly concrete dust. Let me ask a question. What weighs more. 50 pounds of steel or 50 pounds of feathers? They are the same, right? So the towers were 3 buildings built 1 on top of the other. If the top section turned from (I am fabricating a number here) a million pounds of concrete to a million pounds of concrete dust, the 1st and 2nd buildings were still holding the same weight they always held. I think it all boils down to whether or not you believe Bush is a Christian or not. I can not understand how anyone can watch all the videos and still think two planes took out those towers.

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 7:54:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cow451 quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn What I posted is NEW...its just released. Here's the link again..... No what you posted was a website's biased nit picking of quotes from the actual NIST papers that completely ignore the facts. the website you poste grabbed comments out of context. I will take my information on NIST from reading what they actually wrote instead of your quote mined phrases if you don't mind. The NIST letter was pretty clearly a rebuke of the conspiratorial assertions when read in its entirety.

rlj -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 8:18:52 PM)
quote: 1. Rumsfeld under direct order from the W. House, changed the engage protocol at NORAD, just 6 months prior to 911. Under the new protocol, NORAD had to seek specific permission from Bush, Cheney or Rummy before engaging any stray or unidenified aircraft. 2. Under Executive Order from the W. House, VP Cheney was given all access to NORAD for the purpose of conducting war games. This, just 6 months before 9/11 and despite opposition from Congress and other key members within the US Govt. This is clearly not the VPs job. Can you please tell us the # of these executive orders? That way we can look them up ourselves. Lucky I got my new shiny hat for this thread! :D

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 9:54:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: draexo Boo! Been busy in other forums. But it is always nice to come back to 9/11. I find it impossible that the steel reached 1000 degrees C. Maybe 1000 degrees F... not C. As for 9/11.... believe what you want. The laws of physics can not be broken except by God Himself. Those towers turned to dust BEFORE they hit the ground. Watch the videos. The top section of the one tower starts to fall and then VAPORIZES. If the towers had pancaked, there would have been floors stacked upon floors of broken steel and concrete. Not mostly concrete dust. Let me ask a question. What weighs more. 50 pounds of steel or 50 pounds of feathers? They are the same, right? So the towers were 3 buildings built 1 on top of the other. If the top section turned from (I am fabricating a number here) a million pounds of concrete to a million pounds of concrete dust, the 1st and 2nd buildings were still holding the same weight they always held. I think it all boils down to whether or not you believe Bush is a Christian or not. I can not understand how anyone can watch all the videos and still think two planes took out those towers. Good to have you Draexo, Yeah, its obvious that the fires in the WTC were oxygen starved...the black smoke shows this clearly. One thing we all agree on, on both sides, is that MOST of the fuel was burned off in the initial impact...hence the fireball. So, whatever was inside burning could not have reached 1000 degrees. Not even close. I also do NOT believe the fire protection was stripped off in the impact. The towers AND building 7 dropped like rocks and the pulverized concrete is very suspcious. Many are now leaning toward Generation 4 Nukes or even soemthing else. But, some thing else happend that day....its just common sense to see it. The notion that Building 7 was badly damaged is absurd. There are NO pics of this....and even whatever damage did occur could not cause a free fall drop like that. I mean, come on guys...we're all smarter than this. Buildings don't drop at free fall speed in their own foot print unless its somehow planned. Its just common sense that soemthing is VERY wrong with the official account...the official story. its all right there on video and is just common sense... As for the Ex. Orders? I don't have access to those Doc.s but have seen at least one version. I trust the people who are trying desperately to bring the truth out and I can't see anyone fabricating such a thing as this when it could jeopardize their plans and vision. If it would leak out that someone made this stuff up, it'd ruin them and I don't see anyone in the Truth movement making up such a thing. Perhaps over exaggerating, yes, but not out and out lying. The Govts every open about its corruption and hijinx. Just look at the stuff on the NSA website about the CIAs ilk as well as other stuff thats made known. They have the guts to lay it all out but we're all too stubborn and dumb to connect the dots.... Our Govt is covering up something about 911....and its gonna come out....mark my words. This NIST admission is just the first. Backpacker says hello...[:D]

rlj -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 10:32:25 PM)
Executive orders aren't secret. The following link is a list of all executive orders signed by Dubya. Please show us the ones you are mentioning. http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/wbush.html

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 11:50:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rlj Executive orders aren't secret. The following link is a list of all executive orders signed by Dubya. Please show us the ones you are mentioning. http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/wbush.html They certainly can be...and perhaps it was not an official order. I'll look into it... For now though, here's a PDF article by a professional critiquing the NIST testing and data. Its a VERY interesting lookat the testing and data that the NIST is working on. This article was written in 2006, a year before this weeks admission that the pancake theory is inaccurate. http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200612/NIST-WTC-Investigation.pdf

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/22/2007 11:56:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rlj Executive orders aren't secret. The following link is a list of all executive orders signed by Dubya. Please show us the ones you are mentioning. http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/wbush.html I clicked the link and I see your point, its not there. However, that doesn't mean an ORDER of some sort wasn't initiated....perhaps its not officially called that. I KNOW that Rumsfeld change the protocol before 911...that I saw. But, I have to find it. AND, I know that Cheney was at NORAD conducting war games. Thats also documented.

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/23/2007 12:44:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn quote: ORIGINAL: rlj Executive orders aren't secret. The following link is a list of all executive orders signed by Dubya. Please show us the ones you are mentioning. http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/wbush.html I clicked the link and I see your point, its not there. However, that doesn't mean an ORDER of some sort wasn't initiated....perhaps its not officially called that. I KNOW that Rumsfeld change the protocol before 911...that I saw. But, I have to find it. AND, I know that Cheney was at NORAD conducting war games. Thats also documented. OK, not an ex order from Bush...but from Cheney himself... This Youtube video explains it all....and it has MAINSTREAM footage to back it up.... Its very disturbing what our VP was doing the morning of 911....he should be charged for his crimes....he had intent and motive in allowing the plane to strike the Pentagon.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em_XyTeNA1g

EverLearning -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/23/2007 7:22:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn quote: ORIGINAL: cow451 quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn What I posted is NEW...its just released. Here's the link again..... No what you posted was a website's biased nit picking of quotes from the actual NIST papers that completely ignore the facts. the website you poste grabbed comments out of context. I will take my information on NIST from reading what they actually wrote instead of your quote mined phrases if you don't mind. The NIST letter was pretty clearly a rebuke of the conspiratorial assertions when read in its entirety. We'll see. They're being sued for inaccuracies and other failures in regards to the 911 investigation. They've been dragging their feet for 6 years about the collapse of building 7. The 911 Omission report had NOTHING in it as well. But, its all coincidence though....yeah, right. Um actually NIST addressed the wtc 7 thing a few years ago, I will see if i can find one of the old reports for you. They had the best pictures i have seen from those who were on the ground prior to wtc7's collapse and the damage was very extensive. And these aren't the grainy photos that your sites love to provide, these are close in clear pictures.

EverLearning -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/23/2007 7:26:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cow451 quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn What I posted is NEW...its just released. Here's the link again..... No what you posted was a website's biased nit picking of quotes from the actual NIST papers that completely ignore the facts. the website you poste grabbed comments out of context. I will take my information on NIST from reading what they actually wrote instead of your quote mined phrases if you don't mind. The NIST letter was pretty clearly a rebuke of the conspiratorial assertions when read in its entirety. Why take anything in it's entirety when you can make it what you want, watch what i do with your quote above: "The NIST letter ... clearly a ... conspiratorial assertions when read in it's entirety. "

EverLearning -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/23/2007 7:32:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn Many are now leaning toward Generation 4 Nukes or even soemthing else. If there weren't people out there that believed this it would be extremely hillarious. I am starting to think that the people running these conspiracy threads are sitting around with smoking their illegal cigarettes having this conversation: #1: "wow we convinced them that the planes they watched hit the towers didn't do any damage" #2: "oh i know let's see if they will believe that it was controlled demo" #1 &2: "hahahahahahaha they bought it" #1: "hey let's tell them it was nukes" #2: "look they are buying it, what next" #1: "let's tell them the towers never existed, it was just a false flag to start a war" #2: "this is too easy"

RingsofSaturn -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/23/2007 9:22:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EverLearning quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn Many are now leaning toward Generation 4 Nukes or even soemthing else. If there weren't people out there that believed this it would be extremely hillarious. I am starting to think that the people running these conspiracy threads are sitting around with smoking their illegal cigarettes having this conversation: #1: "wow we convinced them that the planes they watched hit the towers didn't do any damage" #2: "oh i know let's see if they will believe that it was controlled demo" #1 &2: "hahahahahahaha they bought it" #1: "hey let's tell them it was nukes" #2: "look they are buying it, what next" #1: "let's tell them the towers never existed, it was just a false flag to start a war" #2: "this is too easy" wrong, that's what the Govt is doing.....

EverLearning -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/23/2007 9:32:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RingsofSaturn wrong, that's what the Govt is doing..... The governement is not the one expecting people to believe that someone figured out how to use nukes to take down a building without frying everyone around. The government is not the one who is attempting to get us to believe that jumbo jets didn't fly into the towers even though we watched them. The government is not the one telling people who saw with their own eyes a jet fly into the pentagon that they didn't actually see it. The government is not the one who is trying to convince us that a controlled demolition occurred when if you look at the actual fall it looks NOTHING like a CD. The government is not the one trying to tell us that there was no damage to WTC 7 when in fact a HUGE portion of the lower floors was GONE leaving the upper floors unsupported. Need i go on.

cow451 -> RE: NIST admits WTC-911-Pancake theory isn't accurate- (10/23/2007 1:19:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: draexo Let me ask a question. What weighs more. 50 pounds of steel or 50 pounds of feathers? They are the same, right? So the towers were 3 buildings built 1 on top of the other. If the top section turned from (I am fabricating a number here) a million pounds of concrete to a million pounds of concrete dust, the 1st and 2nd buildings were still holding the same weight they always held. I think it all boils down to whether or not you believe Bush is a Christian or not. I can not understand how anyone can watch all the videos and still think two planes took out those towers. Here's a question: which weighs more, a fifty pound weight sitting on your head or a fifty pound weight dropped from a height of seven feet? Then follow that with several additional weights dropped each from seven feet higher than the first. I think it all boils down as to whether [cannot say due to TOS].[sm=crazy.gif]

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI