Seems to me that all this conspiracy theories are given too much credit to a bunch of highly incompetent guys! Can you imagine the degree of sophistication that it would take to plan and pull off something like the 9/11 if indeed it was an inside job? I don’t believe for a moment that the Bush administration has what it takes to do it. That they benefited from it? Yes! That somehow they may have known beforehand ad did nothing to stop it? Perhaps! But that they planned and executed the whole thing? Mind-boggling!

There are some poignant and unanswered questions in the 9/11 conspiracy videos I have seen (and I have seen them all) that need further investigation. But nonetheless, they are threading thin in some of their theories and arguments. Namely, they go to great lengths to prove that both of the twin towers and tower 7 fell from a controlled explosion. The only one that follows the common patterns of the building felled by a controlled demolition is tower 7. In a controlled demolition explosives are placed in the lower floors or basement of a building so that upon detonation the lower floors are destroyed and the whole building comes crashing down on itself, due to its own weight, sort of in a reverse pancake, top floors intact, crushing lower floors: 1st floor goes first, then the 2nd floor, then the 3rd floor… and so on, all crushed by the weight of the floors above them which remain still intact and coming down on them with enormous kinetic energy, pulverizing everything. And yes! Even though there is some resistance, nearly all the structures that are demolished in this fashion come down at just about free fall speed.

Interesting enough, building 7 seems to fit this pattern totally: if you watch the video closely, you will appreciate that the lower floors start going from under it and the top floors remain almost intact as they come crashing down on them. Classic demolition pattern! Yes, a well trained demolition crew would not have done it any better. Certainly no fire would bring down a building in such fashion, but could it have happen by accident? Yes. It is certainly a possibility: if by any chance the crashing down of both the twin towers hand somehow damaged the infrastructure (lower or subterranean floors of tower 7) then this could account for it falling in such manner. Were the twin towers and tower 7 communicated underground (subway, tunnels, passageways…)? I don’t know about this but if that is the case, that could explain why it fell like it did. Like I said some questions need to be investigated further…

But for as far as the twin towers are concerned, they did not in any way fall in a manner similar to a controlled implosion. Yes, on the surface it may seem that way, enough so to confuse so many people to cry conspiracy and all that. But you must look at the evidence carefully. Neither of the two buildings came crashing down in the typical reverse pancake form. That is the bottom floors (ground level) were not blown first, as they would in a controlled demolition, but rather, the floors were the impact took place were the ones to go first, been pulverized by the weight of the intact floors above them, and then each one of the floors immediately below went from the top down, in a pancake fashion. The towers did not fall from the fires; they fell because the airplane impact weakened enough the internal steel structure for it not to be able to withstand the weigh of the floors above them. And that is why the tower that got hit last came down first, because it was hit at lower floors and it had to support more weight above the impact zone.

At the very least the twin towers did not fall from planned controlled demolition, but due to the impact of the airplanes.

Yes I know. It's hard to believe that the official conspiracy theory is so readily accepted by so many people. But then again people will believe anything they're told to believe. After all the greatest threat to freedom and democracy is blind obedience to authority. Baaah Baah baah, cried the sheeple, as they chewed their cuds, barely glancing up at the threats, secure in their fenced off fields of freedom.

You forgot, like the 911 Omission Report about the centre framework- The core. It was critical to remove the 47 vertical steel columns for the whole thing to come down. There were reports of explosions before and after the planes hit. If they were broken at the bottom then the whole thing was free to fall. The pancake theory doesn't explain why the floors let go and released from the centre core, and why it wasn't left standing some 1000' in the air. Steel frame buildings have burned for 24 hours and not fallen, so why would the towers fall? The steel columns should have been twisted and skewed, not conveniently cut at 30' lengths.

The towers falling into their own footprint defies the laws of chaos and should have fallen OVER, not straight down. The only time a building falls straight down is when its prior floorsupports are removed before their top floors give way. Timing is a scientific calculation that make this possible. Only explosives could help the building fall at the speed of gravity. Many newsmen and firemen reported multiple explosions, like a timed demolition, and said it reminded them of a deliberate demolition.

Since you are sure that you can defy the laws of chaos, laws of gravity and the 3 laws of thermodynamics, why don't you try the million dollar contest braniac, and see if you can win. http://www.reopen911.org/Contest.htm No one as of 5 June 2006 has even entered a valid entry that has all of the demanded points answered with drawings and timelines. Don't be a chicken- please enter if you are so sure you are correct. Since I agree with the unofficial explanation, I cannot prove the official conspiracy theory is true. I guess if the Official conspiracy theorists like you would offer a million dollars to prove they were wrong, America would go broke paying everyone who could prove it scientifically and mathematically. Good thing you're naiive and dumb enough to believe their bullshit by just taking their word on it, and like them, won't put their money where their lying holes are.

Perhaps you should see the video- http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 6399772265 Tell lies talking heads- This is what you believe? Sorry liar we won't have any of your brainwashed logic.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 8922201999 Most recent video from FEB 2006 actually spells it out for you. Watch it and then respond to each of its questions with explanations, timelines and diagrams, beyond the official conspiracy theory.

It has be surmised by people like Steve Jones that it would require about 3-5 days and 10-30 people to plant the thermite explosives, knowingly or unwittingly, to make sure the columns were conveniently "cut" to 30' lengths for shipping quickly from the site. Evidence tampering from a crime scene is tampering. Don't you watch CSI? The WTC was shut down for a week a month before 9/11 for "renovations". Pleanty of time to do their dirty work in secret.

What, do you actually think your government is above such acts? Then you're ignoring the lessons of history.

Tell their lies talking head, tell their lies talking head.

First of all, there is no need to call names or insult anyone, regardless of their position on any issue. Freedom of speech guarantees us the ability to express our ideas but does not give us the right to verbally assault anyone that does not agree with our viewpoint. A little common courtesy goes a long way. I could just the same call you naïve and dumb for following blindly the conspiracy theoreticians, but where would that lead us… Anyway, I’ll like to think that you have arrived at your conclusions after careful meditation, so I respect you. But I also would like to be reciprocated.

You should know that I have arrived at my conclusions after careful meditation of all the evidence that I have been able to find so far, which I have found on the web, since I don’t have access to first hand data (I assume neither do you). Most of the purported facts presented by the conspiracy theoreticians have fail to impress me as been relevant enough to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the towers had to have been felled by explosives, and it seems to me that the burden of the proof lies with you (innocent until proven guilty and all that). There is no doubt in my mind that in a court of law they would fail to make their case.

This said I feel compelled to defend myself (and I shouldn’t be) about my political views or sympathies. I am not American and that’s just as well, and I have very little sympathies for the way your president and his entourage are running that great country of yours into the ground and the world affairs in particular. I also have no sympathies whatsoever for those criminals that kill indiscriminately in the name of God. In the end they will have their just retribution. It is for the grace of God that I was not killed by their misguided actions on the Madrid terrorist attacks. All this is to say that I am neither for nor against your government, and that I’m not blindly following anyone. At this point there is no way for me to know whether all or anyone in the US government knew beforehand or was directly involved in planning or failing to stop the 9/11 attacks in any way. To me it seems far fetched and gives them more “credit” than they deserve, although I don’t place some of them beyond the possibility to do just about anything in their means to keep their power. As a professor of mine used to say, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” But thinking about it with a cool mind: can you imagine the quantity of people that would need to be involved to achieve what you suggest? That is, to plan and execute 9/11, with planes and explosives in place so as to assure that the buildings fell, and then to cover it all up? Mind-boggling!

As I said initially, there are many poignant questions that remain to be answered but to me they point more in the direction of the absolute and many times demonstrated inefficiency of your elected officials and those in power and their pale attempts to cover up such inefficiency. It is just as simply as that.

The only thing that concerns me at this point is the so called use of explosives to bring down the Twin Towers. It is inconsistent with what took place. As one great man said, “Once you take out all the impossible, what remains, whatever implausible must be the truth.”

Watch carefully this sequence of video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 1151&q=WTC. It clearly shows the side of the building bending inward as the crushing weight of the top starts falling. No explosions here. The building simply gives way from structural damage. It has been said that the only way that the buildings could have collapsed at almost free fall speed would be with the aid of explosives. If this is so it was done in a most inefficient way. It would have suffice to place enough explosive charges on the bottom floor to knock it out and the whole thing would have come crashing down as we see in most controlled demolitions (and, I agree, as it would seem to be the case for building 7). But if they used explosives, they had to have been placed at every floor so they could be detonated in order and at such a precise sequence and timing, from the airplane impacted floors down to the lobby, as to be a no small feat of engineering (overkill if you ask me). Besides, explosives tend to blow things outward and we don’t see windows being blown out as the floors were collapsing. The puffs of debris we see coming out of some windows several floors bellow the collapsing floors could be accounted by the fact that debris would have fallen faster through the centre elevator shafts, some of it eventually finding its way out some windows…

And know, to answer some of your points: if the 47 vertical steel columns were removed by explosives at the bottom, then the building would have come down from the bottom up, as it happens in controlled demolitions (and building 7), and not from the top down (pancake fashion) as it happen here. I agree with you, no steel building has fallen like the towers from just fire (I saw the Winsord burn in person and its fire was much more intense than at the WTC), but then no other steel building has been impacted by such a massive aircraft flying at full speed. Te combination of the damage done by the hit and the fire was enough to do irreparable damage and bring them down. The core centre was sturdy but not enough so to hold the crushing weigh of 10 to 20 floors once it was damaged. And with this we must remember that the one that came down first was the one that was hit last, but lower, and that therefore had more floors above the impact zone.

As for the steel columns been cut in convenient 30' lengths, perhaps it is because that was their original size before they were welded and riveted together? I don’t know, I am just asking. You certainly must be joking when you say that thermite explosives were used to cut all the steel beams into convenient 30' lengths. Can you imagine the insurmountable amount of work that such feat would require? There was a staggering amount of steel in that building and most of it inaccessible (covered, insulated, tucked away). Yes parts of the WTC were been renovated. Buildings that size undergo constant renovation, but common! I am glad that my paranoia has not gotten the best of me yet!

As for hearing many explosions: a loud enough bang to seem an explosion can be caused not only by explosives, but also by debris falling, cement cracking, metal snapping… we are talking about massive forces been generated here.

You say that “The towers falling into their own footprint defies the laws of chaos and should have fallen OVER, not straight down. The only time a building falls straight down is when its prior floor supports are removed before their top floors give way.” Well, this is what I am talking about when I say “bad science”. The law of chaos has nothing to do with a building falling into its own footprint or failing to do so, the law of gravity does. Things tend to fall straight down, unless something interferes with its path. A tree cut down will topple over because it remains solid enough (in one piece). A building, however, when its base support is taken (lower columns) will tend to disintegrate (lose its consistency, break down…) due to its massive weigh (its potential energy) being transformed into kinetic energy as gravity pulls it down, and all the resulting fragments will keep falling straight down if unimpeded. And that, my friend, is why demolition works so nicely. The reason that the towers did fall into their own footprint is that when the top floors started crashing down on the ones below them they did not find enough resistance to stop them, and each successive floor added to the crushing weight trampling the ones below them. Simple as that!

So in other words you have nothing to say. All you've done is mouthpiece the same garbage.

What's the matter? Can't tell it to the million dollar contest? '' Chaos theory applies to the fact that the buildings should have fallen over. What was causing the floors below the pancaking ones to give way? Hint--EXPLOSIVES!

Take your theories to the contest. You aren't saying anything here except the same lies and propaganda you've been fed. I don't have time for children or bleating sheep. Take your "Truth" to your kiddie chat lines.

Talking heads tell lies , Talking heads tell lies.

Conspiracies go on and on, in all ages of politics and there are only too many people who will be silent about it. That or be killed, lose their families or jobs for generations- well known tactics to manufacture obedience and consent. You know- The old "You'll never work in this town again" Syndrome.

Perhaps you should spend an hour listening to this seminar by Michael Parenti and listen to what he says about this problem. The stories are such that one can only marvel at the history that has been crafted for us. Take the story of Paschendale, or the stories of the records of the civil war. Documents are still top secret 140 years later! There is too much precedent to ignore, and as I said, you only need 10-30 people in the know at the top to pull this off. The rest all obey orders. Like the guy who was telling Cheney on 911 that the plane was coming in towards the target and he gave it's distance every 10 miles. "Is there any change?" (to the orders) he asked? "Of course not! " snapped Cheney- "Have you heard any different!"

This recording by Parenti was from 1994. Here's one your prof. didn't tell you. George Santanyana- "Those who don't learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them over and over again."

Parenti says that- "History is written by those who can afford to write it."

http://www.tucradio.org/0607parentihistoryone.mp3
http://www.tucradio.org/0614parentihistorytwo.mp3

Oh and if I was paranoid, I wouldn't raise my objection to the structure of authority. I would bow to it and believe it no matter what it preached. As it is now, I am putting my reputation on the line and one day, perhaps when they decide "who is with us and who is with the terrorists", my words and thoughts are well documented. Such is the reality of free speech. True paranoia is to keep it in, letting it fester inside and living with that angst, and not face the reality of its dimensions, its cognitive dissonances. This is what makes one paranoid.

The fanatical patriot is more paranoid and traitorous than the one who fights for his rights and freedoms against despots. Many of the founding fathers said these very things. So who is paranoid- who is the traitor? The zealous patriot who would give up his freedoms for security? Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. As Samuel Johnson said- "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." In other words, what forces and factors are at work that make his pre-decisions for him? This is par tof what we have to do, learn what makes us believe the things we do and why?

Start by asking why you believe in something, like a god.
Use the W5H formula and try to self analyse your beliefs.

As for calling you names, well you better develop some thicker skin than that if you wish to learn anything about this lifetime. If that's all it takes to make you run away then grow up. Whether you're American or not, the U.S. is shaping the world and there is no more important force to deal with right now. So accept that they are on a mission and the deaths of a few thousand people is merely business as usual. Take a look at Iraq and count the dead there. it doesn't matter when the object is to continue the control over wealth and power.

You're core explanation is hollow and apologetic without any facts remotely based on physics, since you haven't established their lengths or strengths, how they were put together or the stresses the floors would have put on them(Especially since each floor was made of special lightweight concrete and was pulverised into dust!), as well as you're "Simple as that "Quote at the end. You claim you have done the research and then you give a purely assinine parroted answer. Better do some better investigating there buddy. This is the lamest excuses I've read in a long time.It could be a grade 3 answer. My professor indeed! My Kindergaten teacher maybe! Are you sure you weren't hired by the 911 Omission Report?

Could someone explain how the chaos theory applies to KE=(1/2)mv^2 or PE=mgh? When you drop a bowling ball and a tennis ball from the same height, they both fall straight down and hit the ground at the same time, even though they are different masses. If they chaos theory applied, wouldn't they hit the ground at different times or not fall straight down? Just curious as to how the chaos theory works and applies to everyday concepts like gravity. Please give facts, examples, theories, etc. No name calling needed.

Perhaps a hurricane was blowing that day when a bowling ball and a tennis ball fell. If you could find them, the bowling ball would have hit the ground first and the tennis ball would appear in the next county.

That enough chaos or do you need a vacuum to prove that objects fall at the same rate of speed.

Like the twin towers, You have to have a vacuum in your brain to believe that they fell at the same speed (of gravity). This is an acceptable definition of chaos theory. The brain is in chaos and will be sucked into believing that things like that happen under perfect conditions- like 911. It was the perfect con job with fractals of knowledge sent out to baffle the young with more government BS. All that is left is to pick up the pieces of logic and present them so people can accept the reality that has been fed to them and create a pattern that fits.

Kind of like the god machine. Bases chaos on perfect order, but you have to live in a vacuum to accept that as order out of chaos.

Do you think the towers fell faster than the pull of gravity? If so, how do you prove that, except for the whole "chaos theory" remark. Again, define chaos theory.

When a building falls into its own footprint once it is a fluke. When 3 buildings fall into their own footprint on the same day within a stones throw of each other, it is impossible. The only way a building falls into itself is if it was meant to.

The buildings fell as fast as they could with the help they got from the disappearing floors below. That is how they fell into themselves and not onto the other bulidings around them. The times of the buildings collapses have all been documented by many independant analysts and seismic recorders and appear here in another post.

Chaos theory states that there is disorder to a random occurence, but that is because we cannot see or predict the underlying order through careful scrutiny of the forces that shaped and controlled the event. Without certain information we can never confirm or deny that what we have been told or seen about an event can be true or otherwise discerned from the presented facts.

Black holes, dark matter etc are theories that help to shape the forces at work invisibly oin the universe. It helps to explain forces and can be proven to exist, but no one has seen them. It is a theory that fits. There may be another great force at work but it cannot be proven to exist, so given explanations, like the god machine, that fit and help people to their observers position and put the whole universe into a tidy little box.

This is the kind of thing that is used to help people understand a greater purpose or meaning to an event or their lives and satisfies their need to know.

But this is old hat and has been hashed and rehashed for centuries. Perhaps it is another example of the chaos theory at work. Would humans regress into chaos if there wasn't order to life? Even our genetic code seems to be a part of this and guides us to find comforts and understanding as part of its primal instinctive prerogatives.

We are victims of our physical/psychical opportunities and our lives are governed by forces that have power over our very instincts. And all because of some primitive survival instinct you may have adopted from the first geoducks or sponges you evolved from. This is the butterfly effect and is the basic premise of the Chaos theory.



Or maybe a building that should have fallen over for some reason falls straight down into itself- a prime example of a controlled demolition. The chaos is in the explanation of the preparation of the event, not the event itself.

I thought when something in science happens over and over again, we consider it a law, not a fluke. Kinda like the "law of gravity." Why not try an experiment similar to the "official" reason for the tower collapse. Maybe something like: build a model of tall tube-like building out of toothpicks, 2x4's, or even brick, like a chimney. Then drop a heavy object (large rock maybe) onto your creation. Would the structure collapse straight down due too gravity or would it fall to the side as you suggest? You might be surprised. I don't fully understand chaos theory yet, but reading your definition and some definitions on the web, it seems like maybe you are taking it out of context and applying it to something that doesn't quite fit. The law of gravity is hardly disorder. Scientists may not know how exactly it is created but it is a law of science that is repeatable.

Air pressure does not give. It is an uncontrollable force that has to be compromised. Floors dont have a pancake effect without a controlled air pressue escape. You name me one building that came down using the pancake effect that wasnt a controled demolition. Take a frisbee and drop it straight down flat. It doesnt go down flat. It tilts to the side hence air pressure trying to escape. Why dont papers fall straight down. Watch the videos againd. See how the dust and debris recycle back into the buildings center. It plumes out over the top of the building as it is falling and then goes back in through the top. That means there was a created vacum. A controlled vacum. Thats why buildings fall into their center during a controlled demolition. They implode. Buildings dont naturaly implode. That means a vacum was created. If not the floors would have started to stagger out when it reached the bottom half. just like a Jenga game. Air pressure would force the floors to the side of one another just like the frisbee.

Sorry but your attempt to apply a scientific approach to explain your assumed result will not yield the results you wish for. Like I said, it is wonderful to think we have a god protecting us, but we have one, only because we want it to be so. It fits our needs and desires to believe that there is only one explanation of events- the official one. This is your wish for the WTC.

Your pretend experiment is flawed and limited by size and materials and actual occurences that affected the towers integrity. The results you wish for are wonderfully planned to get the results you hope for. This is what the 911 (C)Omission report was meant to do.

Gravity is not a brick falling from above. Gravity is a constant force which applies itself when the conditions are met for it to work. Yours is not a scientific experiment. REAL Science assumes a result and then goes about testing it using as many factors that would contradict it as possible. There have been tests done with simulations on computers of the towers, but the results are shaky at best. Perhaps the 911 Omission Report should be your next read and then search for all the things you and they have ignored and omitted before you assume something scientific.

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/gua ... rosoft.htm -Steel Structure Nonlinear FEA Simulation Provides Insight into World Trade Center Collapse. FEMA

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/models/index.html Simulations- Modeling Aspects of the Twin Towers' Collapse- NIST- These simulations are all about minutiae of fires and smoke plumes, with nothing about the physics of the collapses. With tens of millions of dollars at its disposal, NIST couldn't spend a few thousand dollars to study progressive collapse, the newfound phenomenon that accounted for the total destruction of all three skyscrapers, WTC 1, 2, and 7. (Remember WTC7 was never hit by a plane.)

Since one should see both sides, the NIST report- http://wtc.nist.gov/
When you read this they project a sense of knowing and decision making that makes one question their motives and intent.

Wooooooo they got their own experts, hand picked to review the scene and photos. Wow real science in action!


Remember to check out all facts related including temperatures of fires which vary, causes of fires and fuel dispersal, times of impact and duration of fall ect.

Gee, what happened to the pancake theory everyone loves to swallow with syrup and buttered up. Probably wouldn't hold up to scrutiny in the final analysis so they put the "Fix" on, to make something else more plausible, like their theory of a block coming down on it and ignoring those that said that there were explosions in the basement before the planes hit. Make the witnesses less credible and ignore them.


This is the best these "Experts" could come up with to explain away the events? If they were so sure of their results, then why didn't they let other independant analysts survey and test the wreckage? Why was it locked up, stacked up and shipped off to China so they could send us back some of their cheap crap appearing in a Wal-Mart near you? This is tampering with evidence and in the REAL world you can get off a murder conviction if you can prove tampering by so called "Experts" But since these experts were handpicked to arrive at a predetermined conclusion, this has nothing to do with science or facts. It is a cabal that has made decisions that can Never be verified since the evidence is gone. But there have been some pieces of steel that were secretly taken from the WTC site that reveal a different story. Steve Jones has more to say on that.

The Tower1 film shows the antenna falling first and then the walls came down. Is this not the center falling first? There was no chunk that fell first, your BRICK falling scenario. Tower7 is said to be set on fire by other buildings falling and a large diesel supply in the basement igniting, but burned for nearly 8 hours before it collapsed. All this talk about fire retardant materials being removed by planes and debris as a key to their collapse and temperatures high enough to melt steel? Nothing but fitting contrived speculation to a situation so it appears to make sense. There's the god game at work again.

Here's a video on youtube that simulates the fall. It has some nice calming music to help you forget the horror of that day as it tries to sweep you up into its choreographed assymetry. He claims to use NISTand FEMA reports but still tries to validate the Pancake theory. Funny, NIST let that dead horse go, but people still persist in holding onto it. Like the block above caused thefall, the so called brick from the sky theory. People are so caught up in their wish to have things just so, their devotion to country and integrity of its leaders makes them blind devotees to anothe ruse. His name is- mmmlink -and you must subscribe to watch it. http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center? Of course he doesn't show WTC7 at all as it was nevewr hit by a plane but fell down anyway. Funny what a little fire can do. Was it intentiomnally 'Pulled" so it would explain 1&2 falling because they burned? You didn't need the planes, only the fires caused by the planes. Smoke and mirrors.

Here's History Channels piece of Propaganda for the sheeple on WTC7- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVSxeJH_RCY&NR read what Midex puts in his comments for an outline of how propaganda can be disseminated.

This from the FEMA report and MSC software- Simulating Reality



A mockup will not yield the results unless it is built to give the results desired. This is unreal science. Imagine asking for a study and then setting the parameters for the study. Do they comply with your expected results? Make sure the information you give fits your description and not the actual layout. This is how they rig the wheel. It is not REAL SCIENCE. They hire an engineer and don't give him the plans and conditions so he can set up the experiment? Typical wait and see attitude.


So many unanswered questions to a supposed scientific analysis? This is chaos theory being presented to you as order? Chaos theory deals with events that can't be seen or factored in until every detail has been carefully thought out. To bypass theory they presented their "Facts " as proof of order.

"A plane hit the side of the building, high up, at a fast speed with a cargo of jet fuel (Note- Not a brick from above), it burned and caused some office fires; 1 hour later the steel melted and the building fell straight down. Now, how can we make this fantasy seem real? I know! A simulation, set with our parameters,and verified by our Pop Mech rag. That should do it. That's scientific enough for the rubes. What they don't know we can tell them OVER and OVER again, until it becomes the truth!"

After you've read the above URL's finish off by reading this paper for some REAL Science- http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
After reading this paper, you may wish to sign the petition calling for release
of U.S. government-held information regarding events of 9/11/2001:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeacti ... 1141667399
(Click on "See full petition" before signing.)
Updated August 15, 2006: http://www.journalof911studies.com/Jone ... Center.pdf


A new journal containing more peer-reviewed papers presenting research regarding 9/11/2001 is available here:
http://www.journalof911studies.com/

So get to work and read. You want to know what real science is? Well get busy and investigate! Perhaps you should also do some studying on gravity, the laws of thermodynamics and heat distribution through radiation and absorption in metals, as well as the latest understanding of how gravity works and the theory of the graviton. Report back to me when you get some scientific results verifiable with facts. Remember that there is order to chaos theory. It just can't be envisioioned unless you have all the facts from the micro to the macro to explain its progress. There are far too many questions left unanswered or explained away that don't add up. Perhaps in the future we will have the technology to answer all lifes mysteries but until then we are left to question realities presented. After all, Propaganda can't be discerned by the receptor unless he can see another side to the madness- he knows its purpose and meaning. Propaganda is proposed by those who gain from its dissemmination. Again follow the money. Who has the most to gain from the official story? What do you have to lose if you go against the explanation and the general consensus? Outside of notoriety, people like Steve Jones and people who step forward risk their lives, carreers, credibility etc. just by opening their minds to general scrutiny for the sake of science and discovery.

You've got your work cut out for you now. Get on it flatfoot. Report back when you have some conclusions.

This is off topic but I have to say. How did they plant charges so fast in tower 7 to bring it down. Bringing a tower that size down takes a minimum of weeks to prepare. How in one day, when they were making people leave the island, did someone get into the building to bring it down. What does the term "pull it" mean. Did they tie a rope to the building and "pull it" down(sarcasm). THAT is a question I want answered. kmac there are plenty of vidoes to see about this whole thing(911 in general). Whether you want to believe it or not is up to you. I dont care how you go, but I will argue with you on my opinions. If you need dvd's of these films I will be more than happy to "purchase" one and send it to you. Im not saying Im 100% behind the conspiracy theories but I WANT ANSWERS. If the govnt wants us to believe these stories then they can answer these question yet they dance around them and accuse "liberals" of trumping up conspiracies. I remember when watergate was a "conspiracy".

Air pressure does not give huh. So, when you drop the bowling ball it skews to the side and doesn't drop straight down because of air pressure huh. I take it you guys have never studied physics? Sorry I assumed you realized the experiment would be built in proper proportions similar to the towers only scaled down. Kinda like when they do wind tunnel testing on a smaller airplane model to "see" the effects and then they scale that back up and find out there pretty close, if not on the money. You can't tell me that you don't think models are accurate in predicting real world results. Now, I know you will come up with some abstract exception. I don't understand why you use science in the "religion" part of the board to back up your arguments, but in here you disregard basic science. Have you ever drawn a force diagram? This is not that complicated. When the force of gravity overcomes the force of the steel holding the building up, it collapses straight down. Why didn't the rubble continuing going into the center of the Earth? Because the force of the ground overcame the force of gravity. I suppose you believe in centrifugal force as well? I know it's off topic, but it doesn't exist. It's pointless to go back and forth. I basically wanted your point of view and you gave it to me, and you probably didn't want mine but got it anyway. Thanks for your response.

No. Air pressure does not give. It is displaced.