FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

A viewer guide to Loose Change 2
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Do your research, Blackcat, before rushing to judgement.

That is the only way to reach the truth.

Rushing?? For years I never doubted the nonsense that is the official version of events - like most people I took the governments explanation. My eyes were opened precisely because of dedicated people trying to get the truth out and by then doing hours of research. Which is why people like you make me puke. All the evidence is there and you know it but still you persist in denying it. Did you even bother to read my post from which which you selected a quote. I was stating it is not Silverstein who gives orders to the Fire Dept. As for the firefighters saying the building was about to fall - if that is a result of your "research" then you stick with it. Here is someone who knows what they are talking about http://guardian.250free.com/fire/SLamont.htm

Quote:
For many years the ability of highly redundant composite framed structures to resist the effects of fire has been undervalued and largely misunderstood. ... composite steel-framed structures adopt very large deflections during a fire but do not collapse.

This is a Phd thesis. Do some research yourself before you spout the drivel that the government want you to believe.

You have obviously done zero research and do not want to know any truth. Firemen have great confidence in fighting fires in highrise steel framed buildings precisely because they do not fall due to fire. They most certainly do not fall at the speed of gravity directly downwards. Do some research!! There are many instances of buildings which have fallen due to earthquakes or other reasons and they do not fall directly downwards even though gravity operates directly down. How do you explain the "damage" to WTC7 if the towers fell directly down? The nearest tower was a hundred yards away!! If WTC7 was damaged from debris it was because that debris was ejected that distance because of explosives. There are other factors to consider mostly the resistance of the structure itself. They do NOT get reduced to powder either. You have done ZERO research and have absolutely no interest in truth. Do you find it amusing to come here with your inflammatory comments? The world is being taken over by evil people who committed a massive crime against humanity and you play games? There are people here who are trying to get the truth out - you are a lost cause but even worse you attempt to obstruct the truth being broadcast by your constant repetition of the discredited "evidence" that is the official line. I asked in a previous post if you seriously believe that you can convince people of the veracity of the official line, after they have reached the truth after years of slowly getting the real story, and the answer is you obviously do. What arrogance!

http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/what_was_in_building_7.html

Quote:
What Was In Building 7?
Building 7 was one of New York City's larger buildings. A sleek bronze-colored skyscraper with a trapezoidal footprint, it occupied an entire city block and rose over 600 feet above street level.

Built in 1985, it was formerly the headquarters of the junk-bond firm Drexel Burnham Lambert, which contributed to the Savings and Loans collapse, prompting the $500-billion taxpayer-underwritten bailout of the latter 1980s. At the time of its destruction, it exclusively housed government agencies and financial institutions. It contained offices of the IRS, Secret Service, and SEC.

Tenant Square Feet Floor Industry
Salomon Smith Barney 1,202,900 GRND,1-6,13,18-46 Financial Institution
IRS Regional Council 90,430 24, 25 Government
U.S. Secret Service 85,343 9,10 Government
C.I.A. N/A N/A Government
American Express Bank
International 106,117 7,8,13 Financial Institution
Standard Chartered Bank 111,398 10,13,26,27 Financial Institution
Provident Financial
Management 9,000 7,13 Financial Institution
ITT Hartford Insurance
Group 122,590 19-21 Insurance
First State Management
Group, Inc 4,000 21 Insurance
Federal Home Loan Bank 47,490 22 Financial Institution
NAIC Securities 22,500 19 Insurance
Securities & Exchange
Commission 106,117 11,12,13 Government
Mayor's Office of
Emergency Mgmt 45,815 23 Government

This list is based on a table published by CNN.com, which did not include CIA, whose tenancy was disclosed after the attack in the New York Times article. 1
One of the most interesting tenants was then-Mayor Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management, and its emergency command center on the 23rd floor. This floor received 15 million dollars worth of renovations, including independent and secure air and water supplies, and bullet and bomb resistant windows designed to withstand 200 MPH winds. 2 The 1993 bombing must have been part of the rationale for the command center, which overlooked the Twin Towers, a prime terrorist target.

How curious that on the day of the attack, Guiliani and his Entourage set up shop in a different headquarters, abandoning the special bunker designed precisely for such an event. 3
References

1. List of World Trade Center tenants, CNN.com,
2. Terrorism and Anti-Terrorism, Gotham Gazette, 9/12/01
3. Giuliani Improvises After Command Center Gets Hit, Washington Technology, 10/08/01 [cached]


I wonder what fantasy the government comes up with to explain why they set up shop elsewhere.Probably just do not bother to explain it at all. Most issues relating to WTC7 get ignored. No problem for the government - there are enough blinkered idiots out there to mean its not a problem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Andrew Johnson
Mighty Poster
Mighty Poster


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1919
Location: Derbyshire

PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CTS
Quote:
Do you really expect people to believe such drivel?


Thanks for your usual comprehensive point-by-point rebuttal, without resorting to dismissive adjectives. People will believe what they want.

The 2nd part of my post was my personal explanation for the factual content of the 1st part.

Regards

_________________
Andrew

Ask the Tough Questions, Folks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Andrew Johnson
Mighty Poster
Mighty Poster


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1919
Location: Derbyshire

PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 9:42 am    Post subject: Pattern Matching Reply with quote

You know, I have to wonder.

About 22 years ago - I came across something on our VAX/VMS system at Lancaster University. It was an "Artificial Intelligent" chat program called Eliza. There is a web version now:

http://nlp-addiction.com/eliza/

It basically asks you questions and "pattern matches" your answers to ask more. I wonder if there is more sophisticated software out there which can (autonomously) run multiple dialogues on message boards, just to waste people's time...

Yes, this would be an expensive waste of research money. But seeing as it's our money, would the developers care, if it helped keep their power for longer? After all, this is an information war - and such a development would be a potentially useful info-weapon...

_________________
Andrew

Ask the Tough Questions, Folks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Pikey
Banned
Banned


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1491
Location: North Lancashire

PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CTS states

Quote:
Do your research, Blackcat, before rushing to judgement.

That is the only way to reach the truth.


I totally agree with you on that CTS, but sadly you have clearly not researched the subject nor have you to date provided any evidence or scientific explanation to support the official CT!

I have researched the events and facts of 911 for 12 months CTS, not just the official version as you appear to have limited yourself to. Your continued negative response to my question of whether or not you have read David Ray Griffins two outstanding books of independent research into 911 suggests to me that the true answer to that is no!

Based on my research and I appear to have read more widely on the subject that yourself the official version is a travesty of the truth.

Have you actually listened to, met or ever spoken to an eye witness of those who know the truth CTS? Last year I heard an account given at Manchester Town Hall by the Janitor, William Rodrigez, one the last people to be rescued, who said that he experienced explosions in the basement before the moment of impact of the plane. Firefighters also claim they heard explosions at levels below the impact zone.

It is clear when you read the Keane commission report, the official conspiracy theory of 911! that this report is a cover up, a whitewash.

That CTS appears to also be your modus operandi........a cover up.
Shame on you indeed CTS!

Do you support the 911 Truth campaign demand for a full professional INDEPENDENT inquiry into exposing the truth of 911 CTS?

Peace & truth

_________________
Pikey

Peace, truth, respect and a Mason free society

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaH-lGafwtE#
www.wholetruthcoalition.org
www.truthforum.co.uk
www.checktheevidence.com
www.newhorizonsstannes.com
www.tpuc.org
www.cpexposed.com
www.thebcgroup.org.uk
www.fmotl.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pikey
Banned
Banned


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1491
Location: North Lancashire

PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You want to expose the truth CTS! ..... then check this out for your next bit of research:-

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050204132153814

_________________
Pikey

Peace, truth, respect and a Mason free society

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaH-lGafwtE#
www.wholetruthcoalition.org
www.truthforum.co.uk
www.checktheevidence.com
www.newhorizonsstannes.com
www.tpuc.org
www.cpexposed.com
www.thebcgroup.org.uk
www.fmotl.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
madthumbs
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Screw Loose Change

-Besides all the errors, they're also obvious Zionist deniers.

_________________
-opposingdigits.com-
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144

PostPosted: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kbo234

I'm still waiting for the names of the engineers who spoke at the Chicago conference, their qualifications, their arguments, and whether their arguments had been peer reviewed by structural engineers.

CTS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attention all truth seekers.

Here is a quote from Greg Palast, BBC journalist listed on this site's home page:


On my BBC television show, Newsnight, an American journalist confessed that, since the 9/11 attacks, US reporters are simply too afraid to ask the uncomfortable questions that could kill careers: "It's an obscene comparison, but there was a time in South Africa when people would put flaming tires around people's necks if they dissented. In some ways, the fear is that you will be necklaced here, you will have a flaming tire of lack of patriotism put around your neck," Dan Rather said. Without his makeup, Rather looked drawn, old and defeated in confessing that he too had given in. "It's that fear that keeps journalists from asking the toughest of the tough questions and to continue to bore in on the tough questions so often."
Investigators were ordered to "back off" from any inquiries into Saudi Arabian financing of terror networks.
The reports I did based on this information won the Sonoma State University School of Journalism's Project Censored Award in 2002. It's not the kind of prize you want to win -- it's given to crucial stories that were effectively banned from US airwaves and papers. I don't want any misunderstanding here, so I must emphasize what we did not find: We uncovered no information, none whatsoever, that George W. Bush had any advance knowledge of the plan to attack the World Trade Center on 9/11, nor, heaven forbid, any involvement in the attack.

I have highlighted the most relevant part of the statement in red.

Greg Palast offers no support at all to the MIHOP position.

I offer the quote again:

I don't want any misunderstanding here, so I must emphasize what we did not find: We uncovered no information, none whatsoever, that George W. Bush had any advance knowledge of the plan to attack the World Trade Center on 9/11, nor, heaven forbid, any involvement in the attack.

OK, all your believers in MIHOP, in explosions from planted explosives in the Twin Towers and WTC7, or missiles fired into the Pentagon, or planes disappearing and their passengers gassed.

Greg Palast is one of your friends, and he does not believe all the codswallop churned out about the MIHOP position.

Sweet dreams.

CTS

CTS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MMC
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 44

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 3:19 am    Post subject: Its Acme... Reply with quote

Quote:

What Was In Building 7?


The conventially located explosive mixture company... Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
On my BBC television show, Newsnight, an American journalist confessed that, since the 9/11 attacks, US reporters are simply too afraid to ask the uncomfortable questions that could kill careers:


Did you spot that bit CTS?? Did he say why they are so afraid? Why would it kill careers?? Since when does asking questions lead to career suicide? There is another question for you to ignore!

Quote:
In some ways, the fear is that you will be necklaced here, you will have a flaming tire of lack of patriotism put around your neck," Dan Rather said


How about that bit? Did you see that little bit? Any explanation as to why someone would be "necklaced"? Feel free to ignore that one as well since you surely will.

Quote:
Investigators were ordered to "back off" from any inquiries into Saudi Arabian financing of terror networks.

How about that bit? Can you read that?? Any reason given for why they should be so ordered? Just ignore that - you will anyway!

Do you bother to answer any of the questions posed by the horrible crime perpetrated on 9/11? How do you know Greg Palast is our friend? Why would ANY mainstream journalist be a friend of a truth seeker while almost all of them are pandering to evil people like yourself? You persist in posting junk that anyone can read in the mainstream press even though you know that this site exists precisely because truth seekers need places like this to try to get the truth out. Why are you here?? What is your purpose in being here? You contribute zero and fail to respond to any questions put. You simply ignore difficult issues and blather about what the BBC says. Who cares if Bush did not know - matbe he is just the patsy. There are so many BLATANT lies and deceptions relating to 9/11 that the truth needs to be revealed and only a proper investigation can possibly reach that truth.

Quote:
OK, all your believers in MIHOP, in explosions from planted explosives in the Twin Towers and WTC7

Be careful! Now that the proof that explosives were used is gaining ground in spite of the hasty removal of the evidence by the evildoers whom you support, you will need to change your stance. You will have to allow for the lie that "Arab terrorists" placed these explosives!!! Fairytale believers are already beginning to embrace this lie so don't get too clever about dismissing the existence of explosives.. You are going to have to explain how terrorists placed them there but a little matter of believing the impossible isn't going to deter the likes of you. Feel free to ignore this. When the existence of explosives becomes an absolute proven case just adopt the new fairytale that Arab terrorists put them there - nobody will notice - least of all you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kbo234
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ConspiracyTheorySceptic wrote:

I don't want any misunderstanding here, so I must emphasize what we did not find: We uncovered no information, none whatsoever, that George W. Bush had any advance knowledge of the plan to attack the World Trade Center on 9/11, nor, heaven forbid, any involvement in the attack.


Webster Tarpley, one of the foremost 9/11 MIHOPS agrees with this. Bush does not run the country. He is told what to do and what to say.

The man is transparently an idiot, for God's sake. Why should anyone tell him?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kbo234
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ConspiracyTheorySceptic wrote:
Kbo234
I'm still waiting for the names of the engineers who spoke at the Chicago conference, their qualifications, their arguments, and whether their arguments had been peer reviewed by structural engineers. CTS


The only engineers who deny that the collapses were caused by controlled demolitions are paid liars like yourself.
Concrete does not pulverise when it falls on itself. This just doesn't happen. Accepting, from the film on the day that the concrete did pulverise at the start of the collapse, what then fell on the concrete at the lower levels that also caused it to pulverise? Narrow steel beams? What caused them to be sliced into 30 ft. lengths?
The energy required to turn all the concrete in the building into fine powder, plus the energy required to cut the massive steel beams in thousands of places, plus the energy to expand the pyroclastic flow is much greater than the initial gravitational potential energy stored in the towers before they fell (The heat energy contained in the small fires is insignificant in this context)....and this gravitational energy, according to the official 'narrative', was the sole energy source for the collapses on 9/11.

The most fundamental law in physics (and engineering, if you think there is some significant difference) is the Law of Conservation of Energy i.e. You can't get out more energy than you put in.
Instead of continually referring people on this site to the fraudulent analyses of scientists who have been paid to lie by our criminal masters, go and look at www.911Physics.net and you answer some questions for a change.

The case is proven. Now f*** o**.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kbo234
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Listen to this again folks.

CTS. What do you think of Steven Jones' analysis of material taken from Ground Zero. He thinks he has proven that THERMATE brought down the WTC's. By addressing the evidence can you explain where he went wrong.

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/070606jones.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MMC
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 44

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought that some people would like to read Professor Steven Jones' paper offline. So, I downloaded a copy of the paper and created a *redesigned* offline website that people can download. I separated out the Professor's work into proper chapters, so that it reads like an Electronic Book (E-Book).

The offline website/E-Book can be accessed in two different ways, once you have extracted the files from the .zip file:

1. Simply click on the 'index.html' file within the root folder called 'Jones_WTC_911_Draft_6_4'. This will launch the offline book using your default web browser.

2. Run the included file 'Marx E-Book Browser v1.0.exe'. This is software I created for reading E-books built from offline websites. This application can be used for reading any offline site. Just copy the file to the root folder where the 'index.html' file is located. When you start the program, it will automatically read the 'index.html' file. This is also good for reading reports, providing personal presentations and even submitting course-work as the file is only 28K in size.

In order to run the E-Book, you may need to install the .NET Framework 2.0 from Microsoft (22MB). If you get any errors trying to run the program, 99% of the time it will be because you need to install the .NET Framework.

Microsoft .NET Framework Version 2.0 Redistributable Package (x86)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...&displaylang=en

This file will run on:

Windows 2000 (All Editions)
Windows XP (All Editions)
Windows Server 2003 (All Editions)
Windows Vista (?)

The E-Book software is Freeware, feel free to distribute it.

Link to the E-Book Version of Professor Steven Jones' paper on the collapse of the WTC:
http://www.badongo.com/file/841745

Note: The download counter is disabled and will always read "0".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kbo wrote:
Quote:
ConspiracyTheorySceptic wrote:

I don't want any misunderstanding here, so I must emphasize what we did not find: We uncovered no information, none whatsoever, that George W. Bush had any advance knowledge of the plan to attack the World Trade Center on 9/11, nor, heaven forbid, any involvement in the attack.


Webster Tarpley, one of the foremost 9/11 MIHOPS agrees with this. Bush does not run the country. He is told what to do and what to say.

The man is transparently an idiot, for God's sake. Why should anyone tell him?


Kbo234

Your comment is typical of the way CTs debate. Your reply is a distortion of the writer's (Greg Palast) intention. Clearly, in the context of his remark, by George Bush, he meant the US Government.

OK

CTS

PS Can you please provide that list of the engineers who claim explosives were planted in the Twin Towers?

PPS Whenever any building is brought down by controlled explosions, there are huge clouds of pulverised dust caused by the collapse of thye buildings.

CTS


Last edited by ConspiracyTheorySceptic on Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blackcat
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He must be pissed!! Can anyone make any sense of that ^ ???
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
catfish
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 430

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No Blackcat I cannot. I don't really understand how it is obvious that George W. Bush should be read as US government.

You try it:

George W. Bush
U S government

Nope I'm still not getting it!

However Kbo234's comment is certainly not typical of the way CTS [sic] debates because Kbo234 actually answered a question, and didn't ramble on for half a page about things covered a hundred times before.

CTS never did get back to me on how Brian got out.....

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=6468#6468

I really hope they pay this guy well 'cos I'm starting to feel sorry for him!

_________________
Govern : To control

Ment : The mind
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blackcat wrote:
Quote:
He must be pissed!! Can anyone make any sense of that ^ ???


I have edited my contribution. CTS should have been CTs.

CTS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
catfish
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 430

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know I was only joshing that's why I put this:[sic]

While you're here though CTS, how did Brian get out?

_________________
Govern : To control

Ment : The mind
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

catfish wrote:

Quote:
No Blackcat I cannot. I don't really understand how it is obvious that George W. Bush should be read as US government.


Catfish, I do hope you are only pretending to be stupid, maybe just to wind me up.

If, when Greg Palast wrote: "I don't want any misunderstanding here, so I must emphasize what we did not find: We uncovered no information, none whatsoever, that George W. Bush had any advance knowledge of the plan to attack the World Trade Center on 9/11, nor, heaven forbid, any involvement in the attack.", he had literally meant it to apply only to George Bush, but did not exculpate the US Government, he would have made that clear.

Yet another example of CTs distorting or missing the point !!!

CTS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
catfish
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 430

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You really don't know how Brian got out do you?
_________________
Govern : To control

Ment : The mind
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

catfish wrote:
Quote:
While you're here though CTS, how did Brian get out?


Who is Brian?

CTS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MMC
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 44

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think you are confusing the "US Government" and "Conspiracy", with individuals who are employed in government roles and organised crime.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
catfish
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 430

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doh! Ring a ring a roses..

Here you are again then but I did only leave the link two messages above!

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?p=6468#6468

_________________
Govern : To control

Ment : The mind
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
MMC
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 44

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For anyone new, you can read Professor Steven Jones' paper on the possible use of explosives in the collapse of the WTC on 9/11.

Professor Steven Jones' is a Professor of physics at BYU and the former scientist working on Muon catalysed fusion with the US Department of Energy.

Quote:

I thought that some people would like to read Professor Steven Jones' paper offline. So, I downloaded a copy of the paper and created a *redesigned* offline website that people can download. I separated out the Professor's work into proper chapters, so that it reads like an Electronic Book (E-Book).

The offline website/E-Book can be accessed in two different ways, once you have extracted the files from the .zip file:

1. Simply click on the 'index.html' file within the root folder called 'Jones_WTC_911_Draft_6_4'. This will launch the offline book using your default web browser.

2. Run the included file 'Marx E-Book Browser v1.0.exe'. This is software I created for reading E-books built from offline websites. This application can be used for reading any offline site. Just copy the file to the root folder where the 'index.html' file is located. When you start the program, it will automatically read the 'index.html' file. This is also good for reading reports, providing personal presentations and even submitting course-work as the file is only 28K in size.

In order to run the E-Book, you may need to install the .NET Framework 2.0 from Microsoft (22MB). If you get any errors trying to run the program, 99% of the time it will be because you need to install the .NET Framework.

Microsoft .NET Framework Version 2.0 Redistributable Package (x86)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details...&displaylang=en

This file will run on:

Windows 2000 (All Editions)
Windows XP (All Editions)
Windows Server 2003 (All Editions)
Windows Vista (?)

The E-Book software is Freeware, feel free to distribute it.

Link to the E-Book Version of Professor Steven Jones' paper on the collapse of the WTC:
http://www.badongo.com/file/841745

Note: The download counter is disabled and will always read "0".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Catfish

I thought that was the Brian you were referring to - from weeks ago. But I wanted you to confirm it first.

I think you took the story off Dr Eagar's link:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html

Dr Eagar had been theorising about the collapse of the Twin Towers and had talked of the aviation fuel spreading over the whole of one of the floors. However, in the case of one of the towers, the south one, I think, the plane crashed in one of the corners. In that particular case, the fuel might not have spread over the whole floor, leaving a stairwell free. I assume that that is how Brian got out.

Please note that, just because the fuel had not spread over quite the whole floor, this does not invalidate the logic of Dr Eagar's arguments.

Anyone wanting some rational explanations for the collapse of the Twin Towers should look at Dr Eagar's site.

CTS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
catfish
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 430

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
the fuel might not have spread over the whole floor, leaving a stairwell free. I assume that that is how Brian got out.


My god why didn't I think of the fire possibly not spreading through the whole floor... maybe because Dr. Eagar states this...

The real damage in the World Trade Center resulted from the size of the fire. Each floor was about an acre, and the fire covered the whole floor within a few seconds.

Which is from here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse2.html

He also states this...

The maximum temperature would have been 1,600F or 1,700F. It's impossible to generate temperatures much above that in most cases with just normal fuel, in pure air. In fact, I think the World Trade Center fire was probably only 1,200F or 1,300F.

But you know I'm quite convinced by your explanation that a stairwell might have been free and I'm sure it would have cooled down enough for Brian to get out, in fact I'm convinced you are right, how can anyone refute such a logical argument. Well done CTS on that excellent explanation. *


*sarcasm is being employed here

_________________
Govern : To control

Ment : The mind
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144

PostPosted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

catfish

Please note that, just because the fuel had not spread over quite the whole floor, this does not invalidate the logic of Dr Eagar's arguments.

Dr Eagar was theorising.

OK?

CTS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John White
Site Admin
Site Admin


Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CTS, you strike me as a person with the potential to answer correctly the following question:

"how many fingers am I holding up?"

You might even be able to reference the source of the question for me

Its hardly suprising that Greg Palast found no evidance that George Bush "knew" anything about the September 11th attacks

He was after all the living embodiment of dazed and confused...

However, all that proves is that Greg Palast is unable to prove that George Bush knew anything: not in itself a difficult proposition to prove Laughing

Still didnt make the towers fall down, didnt make building 7 knock itself down, didnt crash a jumbo into the pentagon without mussing up the lawn and didnt make a plane crash into the ground by spreading itself over an 8 mile area: in the way George "I dont know anything" Bush says those things happened anyway

Still, he holds up four fingers, and the hypnotised masses struggle with all their might to see five: or three: or four: or all three at once

Becuase George Bush would never ever Lie...would he?

_________________
Free your Self and Free the World
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Moderate Poster


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144

PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 12:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

John White wrote:
Quote:
CTS, you strike me as a person with the potential to answer correctly the following question:

"how many fingers am I holding up?"

You might even be able to reference the source of the question for me

Its hardly suprising that Greg Palast found no evidance that George Bush "knew" anything about the September 11th attacks

He was after all the living embodiment of dazed and confused...

However, all that proves is that Greg Palast is unable to prove that George Bush knew anything: not in itself a difficult proposition to prove

Still didnt make the towers fall down, didnt make building 7 knock itself down, didnt crash a jumbo into the pentagon without mussing up the lawn and didnt make a plane crash into the ground by spreading itself over an 8 mile area: in the way George "I dont know anything" Bush says those things happened anyway

Still, he holds up four fingers, and the hypnotised masses struggle with all their might to see five: or three: or four: or all three at once

Becuase George Bush would never ever Lie...would he?
_________________
Truthseeking to the edges of infinity at;



John White

Your sarcastic reply is absolutely typical of the dishonest way or stupid way CTs debate.

When Greg Palast wrote:

I don't want any misunderstanding here, so I must emphasize what we did not find: We uncovered no information, none whatsoever, that George W. Bush had any advance knowledge of the plan to attack the World Trade Center on 9/11, nor, heaven forbid, any involvement in the attack,
Clearly, he was saying he found absolutely no evidence for the involvement of George Bush or the US Government in LIHOP, HIHOP or MIHOP scenarios.

For anyone to claim otherwise, is to distort the meaning of what Greg Palast said. For anyone to do that, they have to be either dishonest or stupid.

I challenge these people to contact Greg Palast to ask him to spell out in words of one syllable for the mentally challenged what exactly he meant when he made that statement I have quoted above.
Greg Palast is a name listed on the Home page of this site.

CTS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group