PDA

View Full Version : OT: Landing gear from 9/11 plane found in New York alley.



winchman
04-27-2013, 04:18 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-news/51681870/#51681870

http://media2.s-nbcnews.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Video/130426/nn_02sgo_911gear_130426.video-260x195.jpg

They say it was recently found, but I'd bet someone found it years ago, tried to remove it, and gave up. It would have been worth big bucks on Ebay with proper documentation of it's removal from the alley to prove where it came from. Of course, it might have landed someone in jail for trying to sell it, too.

The rope is obviously not part of the landing gear, and it looks like it's in the right condition for several years out in the elements.

KiddZimaHater
04-27-2013, 05:39 PM
That 'on-site' Female reporter is a moron.
She said that many of the victim's remains have never been found, and that the discovery of this piece of landing gear would bring closure to some of the victim's families.
HUH??

Evan
04-27-2013, 06:44 PM
Obviously finding the landing gear proves the jet hit the building...

wierdscience
04-27-2013, 08:22 PM
Obviously finding the landing gear proves the jet hit the building...

Dunno Evan,never underestimate the mental gymnastics Truthers will go through to keep their fantasies going.By Tomorrow this will be proof that Zionist controlled agents of the Illuminati planted it there to cover their tracks after the controlled demolition we were all fooled into believing.:rolleyes:

J Tiers
04-28-2013, 02:23 PM
There ar e different versions....

1) No airplanes at all.... just lies and demolition.

2) airplanes plus demolition (the third building, which IS strange)

3) no demolition, just burying the reports on the culprits so they were allowed to do the deed because "the country needs it for solidarity". I'd almost believe that of Cheney.... he's a cold one. "Maskirovka" is right up his alley.

Finding parts, however false and planted it might be thought by some, deals with #1, but does nothing for #2 or 3. Besides, have you ever seen the part in question? it might not exist. or there has been plenty of time to make it and plant it.... the list goes on. never underestimate the creativity of conspiracy theorists.

The sad part is the the US government is "almost" capable of that. The government (or some odd small part of it) could do it, but I doubt there is any way they could keep it secret...... No doubt it would eventually come out, unless it was something like #3, that could be limited to a very very few people. The more paranoid might say those people might then slowly be eliminated. Did I mention the creativity of theorists?

Alistair Hosie
04-28-2013, 02:35 PM
Why was this not found till now makes no sense and sounds very suspicious to me.and where is the remains of the so called plane that hit the pentagon.Alistair

flylo
04-28-2013, 02:49 PM
It did suprise me that both towers came down as planes are enineering marvels. Very strong on the air & can be totalled by an ever so small hit on the ground. When I lost my hanger in the tornado took the door off a smaller hanger caught some wind & rolled the Grumman back till the flaps & alierons bumped the T hangers wall. No visual damage but it was totaled. The towers had to be strong to endure the wind load. Just suprised me & I bet benladan that both came down. Gotta go just saw Elvis drive by, damn foot,walker,wait Elvis!:p

Evan
04-28-2013, 05:29 PM
Sigh. The root of all the arguments is based on only a few points of lack of knowledge.

1: The towers fell straight down because physics won't allow a million tons of mass to fall over sideways without a tremendous amount of sideways force applied. The taller it is the farther it must move sideways. Very tall trees will even break in half when falling and the upper half will remain nearly vertical. Nobody has ever seen a very tall building fall before.

2: Steel becomes soft as a cooked noodle at 1200 degrees. No melting required. A candle burns that hot.

3: Aluminum burns

The parts were not found because they are in a crack a foot wide and 5 stories tall. For a long time afterward they were covered in grey dust and then grey mud.

dp
04-28-2013, 06:12 PM
I suspect Occam's razor works best here. It didn't fall there - it was hauled there and abandoned when it became known it was an illegal act. Secondarily it can have been dropped there by the building owners who found to avoid related security or structural problems.

Surely nobody with reasonable faculties gives any credence to the looney notion of anything but aircraft impact and subsequent weakening by fire for the collapse of the buildings.

Ries
04-28-2013, 06:23 PM
I see no reason to believe it wasnt thrown there by the original collapse.
I have a friend who is an electrician in NYC, and he had just finished rewiring a building across the street when 9/11 hit.
He was called in to rewire the whole building all over again, and saw the engine block from a fire engine sitting 40 feet in from the window on the middle of the floor, in a fifth floor condo. It was sitting in a foot deep layer of ash, papers, debris, and other stuff that had been thrown up five stories and over a couple of blocks by the buildings collapsing.
The force of a million tons falling caused a lot of heavy things to fly quite a distance.

flylo
04-28-2013, 06:30 PM
I don't think any other thing caused it but I was suprised both went down. Is it true large amounts of gold was stored in the very lower parts of the buildings?

wierdscience
04-28-2013, 08:40 PM
The force of a million tons falling caused a lot of heavy things to fly quite a distance.

Yup,just look at the now famous street level video of the second impact.Parts of the plane make it all the way through the tower and keep moving at significant velocity.


http://youtu.be/EFiEgwLQVJk?t=4m50s

J Tiers
04-28-2013, 10:23 PM
Sigh. The root of all the arguments is based on only a few points of lack of knowledge.

1: The towers fell straight down because physics won't allow a million tons of mass to fall over sideways without a tremendous amount of sideways force applied. The taller it is the farther it must move sideways. Very tall trees will even break in half when falling and the upper half will remain nearly vertical. Nobody has ever seen a very tall building fall before.

2: Steel becomes soft as a cooked noodle at 1200 degrees. No melting required. A candle burns that hot.

3: Aluminum burns



There is an argument that jet fuel doesn't burn that hot in open burning..... to which the obvious retort is that there is a fair amount of wind at that height, and it can be seen in the pictures of the fires. Blowing air into a fire heats it up.

There is an argument that "traces of thermite were found"..... to which the retort is that a good deal of aluminum was "imported" to the site, and office contents often contain a goodly amount of aluminum also. "traces of thermite" would have to include aluminum and iron/steel in various states of oxidation, which clearly would result from a fire.

There is an argument that there were pictures showing beams cut at 45 degrees, which is typical of demolition. I have seen them in ordinary news, so no secrets there. Dunno about that one, I'd bet there were beams 'cut" at pretty much any angle you care to name. And I simply do not think there is any way that an operation that big could be kept secret....

There is an argument that the buildings "fell too fast", that there was no way for that sort of acceleration. These people apparently think the fall should have stopped at each floor until the weight became too much for it, at which point it would fail.. To that I can only say that the impact of the top 20 or 30 stories falling on the next one is likely to be fairly un-stoppable, due to impact force vs static load, and as more weight is accumulated, and falls farther, it won't get better.
Plus, the columns would have lost the stabilizing effect of being attached to the top part of the building, or even to the floor they were originally attached to.....it was disconnected and falling on them. So they would not have the full Euler formula resistance to bending under load that they would if still attached.

The final argument is that the third building had no reason to fall, but it did. I have no particular answer to that one. One has to suppose that two very large buildings falling in close proximity to it, with debris hitting it, etc, must have done it. if that for sme reason isn't true, then it must have been sabotaged, but keeping that secret seems very unlikely.

The only conspiracy theory that holds any amount of water is the one that says the reports on these guys were just held up, and they were allowed to get on with it for some devious reason. It might have taken 4 or 5 people to do that, max, with Cheney at the top of the plot, as the ex-CIA guy in the room.

A few people can stay clammed for a long time. maybe forever, so it's unlikely we'll ever have proof of that even if it were true, which it just might be..

flylo
04-28-2013, 10:45 PM
I wish they would have built them back to look exactly as they did.

Evan
04-29-2013, 02:22 AM
There is an argument that jet fuel doesn't burn that hot in open burning..

What argument? Of course it does and a good deal hotter than required to weaken the steel enough to give way. All of the petroleum based fuels including coal have nearly the same flame temperature, give or take about 100 degrees C. They all burn at around 2000 C in a stoichiometric mixture and somewhat lower in a rich mixture. 2000C = 3652 F. At 1200 degrees F structural steel loses about 60% of its strength and at 1450 F it is down to only 10% of normal strength.

There was also a much less realized design flaw in that there were three central support columns. They were arranged in a line. All is well with the weight equally distributed until you remove just one. Then, (edit) if you remove either outer column all the weight then falls on just one column. One column was fully taken out in each crash by the impact.

dp
04-29-2013, 03:06 AM
Yup,just look at the now famous street level video of the second impact.Parts of the plane make it all the way through the tower and keep moving at significant velocity.

How many of those parts showed up later with a rope attached?

Greg Q
04-29-2013, 03:41 AM
I too believe that the gear landed there from the impact trajectory. I also believe that it had been discovered sometime in the last twelve years and a failed attempt was made to slavage it, hence the rope.

I also see nothing implausible in the notion that the third building was weakened to the point of failure by the blast effects of the adjacent collapses.

I have an aluminum pan next to a cast iron skillet on the stove...gotta go before I have a thermite event!

Greg Q
04-29-2013, 05:36 AM
In the alley?

John Stevenson
04-29-2013, 07:13 AM
Be a bugger if that landing gear was off the pentagon plane :confused:

wierdscience
04-29-2013, 08:00 AM
How many of those parts showed up later with a rope attached?

Oh,somebody had found it previously and found out it was stuck fast besides being heavy.

vincemulhollon
04-29-2013, 10:01 AM
Could you debunk the "every other skyscraper fire / aircraft impact has not resulted in a collapse within an hour" one?

I'm of the opinion there's a conspiracy theory / cover up but its more of an engineering one or building inspection one than a space alien or political science whopper.

Its hardly the first skyscraper to get hit by a big plane or the first building to be incinerated. In fact they had it kinda easy compared to some, especially the third building which really has no excuse for collapsing.

My personal suspicion is the coverup is to protect a building inspector racket 40 years ago (maybe still ongoing today?), or a faulty design or fake materials or something like that. Maybe to prevent panic if it was realized that "many" other structures from that era have a similar design / construction / material failure mode. Aside from that theory, what I can't answer is the "why"? In the past when the engineers / suppliers / hard hats screwed up as clearly seemed to happen this time, they love to hang them out to dry, so why not? Why can't I read in an engineering textbook, right next to the usual examples, "and the 9/11 collapse is why the building code now prohibits structural steel without spray on fire insulation blah blah" or something about fake structural steel of less than 1/4 the specified strength is why inspectors now use the magic handheld xray zapper on every structural steel inspection, or the structure equivalent of some kind of "fake grade-8 bolt" scandal WRT rivets is why blah blah blah. Just saying I've seen wood buildings stand up to fire better than the 3 towers did... something about the engineering and/or suppliers and/or construction is really smelly.

lazlo
04-29-2013, 10:15 AM
There ar e different versions....

1) No airplanes at all.... just lies and demolition.

2) airplanes plus demolition (the third building, which IS strange)

Conspiracy theories are an attempt to ease cognitive dissonance -- explain the shocking. In the case of the Trade Centers, it was unbelievable that a burning fire could cause two iconic skyscrapers to collapse. There had to be another explanation...

In the case of the Pentagon, the plane completely disintegrated. It had to have been a missile.

Likewise for the Boston bombings. It had to have been a sophisticated plot by Arab terrorists -- it couldn't just be two crazy Russian-Americans that built a crude device out of fireworks.

lazlo
04-29-2013, 10:17 AM
Oh,somebody had found it previously and found out it was stuck fast besides being heavy.

The news is saying that it's wedged so hard between the two buildings that it's going to require demolition to get it out. From the looks of it, several people tried to pry it loose over the years...

Greg Q
04-29-2013, 10:33 AM
What the hell do you mean by "its hardly the first skyscraper to be hit by a big plane"? In fact, and note this well: it is exactly the first, and second, and only instances of tall building plus heavy/fast/fuelled plane. As much as I loathe the equal weight given to fantasy and mud-ignorant conjecture about real, filmed-in-real-time events, I am astonished that some people are unable to grasp the fact that civil engineers may know something (everything) more than conspiracy whack-jobs about building integrity, damage modes, gravity (gravity, for Pete's sake), vibration, etc.

Ignorance is over-rated as a lifestyle choice.

I just checked my invective tank: it's still showing full. And there is plenty more where that came from.

dp
04-29-2013, 10:37 AM
Likewise for the Boston bombings. It had to have been a sophisticated plot by Arab terrorists -- it couldn't just be two crazy Russian-Americans that built a crude device out of fireworks.

True - it wasn't. They were coached but that's a whole 'nuther topic. Has anyone seen a sky view of the roof to know what the environment is like up there? Unless it was nuttin' but net there had to be some damage, even minor, on the roof.

SteveF
04-29-2013, 10:53 AM
Ignorance is over-rated as a lifestyle choice.



But a sadly popular one.

Actually as society has moved from "if you want to find something out you have to drive to the library and spend hours digging through books hoping to find the information" to "a dozen credible references are available from your computer and can be reviewed in a few minutes" I personally am willing to replace "ignorance" with "stupidity".

Steve

lazlo
04-29-2013, 11:32 AM
Actually as society has moved from "if you want to find something out you have to drive to the library and spend hours digging through books hoping to find the information" to "a dozen credible references are available from your computer and can be reviewed in a few minutes"

And most of those dozen "credible references" are the village idiots making sh!t up.

You have to love the State Farm commercial: "Everything on the Internet is true" :)


http://youtu.be/rmx4twCK3_I

A.K. Boomer
04-29-2013, 11:33 AM
That 'on-site' Female reporter is a moron.
She said that many of the victim's remains have never been found, and that the discovery of this piece of landing gear would bring closure to some of the victim's families.
HUH??

Kid you plucked the thought right out of my brain as I watched that same report and said to myself Geeze what an idiot...

like even if they did find a piece of tooth wedged between a couple plates of metal and identified it - its going to make the victims survivors somehow feel much better about it all, what a mindless twit.

Jaakko Fagerlund
04-29-2013, 11:47 AM
Why was this not found till now makes no sense and sounds very suspicious to me.and where is the remains of the so called plane that hit the pentagon.Alistair
Are you f*cking kidding me? Can't visualise an airplane from a wreckage?

lazlo
04-29-2013, 11:49 AM
like even if they did find a piece of tooth wedged between a couple plates of metal and identified it - its going to make the victims survivors somehow feel much better about it all

The media is just milking the discovery for all it's worth. It first showed up at the tail-end of the Boston coverage, and the MSM was very coy about waiting 'till they had milked that frenzy...

PonderCreekStudio
04-29-2013, 11:53 AM
I'm of the opinion there's a conspiracy theory / cover up but its more of an engineering one or building inspection one than a space alien or political science whopper. ... My personal suspicion is the coverup is to protect a building inspector racket 40 years ago (maybe still ongoing today?), or a faulty design or fake materials or something like that.

In NYC? Surely you jest. That's almost as loony as suspecting corruption in Chicago. Joking aside, you bring up a very real possibility, and much more likely than aliens from Pluto or some Cheney conspiracy.

As to some of the comments about the chunk of plane discovered, and the rope, the first thing I wondered is if someone lowered it down in the alley to either A) hide it from discovery for political purposes, or B) hide it in hopes that it would be discovered, again for political purposes. It was found, I think, adjacent to a controversial mosque, which opens up possibilities of, and motives for, both choices -- mosquites hoping it wouldn't be found, or anti-mosquites hoping it would be. It's just lucky one of NY's infamous scrappers didn't come across it first. Some of those fellows will steal a mailbox or mezuzah off your doorpost for the scrap value.

DICKEYBIRD
04-29-2013, 01:21 PM
What the hell do you mean by "its hardly the first skyscraper to be hit by a big plane"? In fact, and note this well: it is exactly the first, and second, and only instances of tall building plus heavy/fast/fuelled plane. As much as I loathe the equal weight given to fantasy and mud-ignorant conjecture about real, filmed-in-real-time events, I am astonished that some people are unable to grasp the fact that civil engineers may know something (everything) more than conspiracy whack-jobs about building integrity, damage modes, gravity (gravity, for Pete's sake), vibration, etc.

Ignorance is over-rated as a lifestyle choice.

I just checked my invective tank: it's still showing full. And there is plenty more where that came from.A B-25 hit the Empire State Bldg. in '45.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Empire_State_Building_crash

Evan
04-29-2013, 01:40 PM
There is a huge difference both in the method of construction of the Empire State building and the amount of energy deposited by the aircraft in the collision. There was also the major difference in the amount of fuel present and the ensuing fire.

wierdscience
04-29-2013, 01:58 PM
True - it wasn't. They were coached but that's a whole 'nuther topic. Has anyone seen a sky view of the roof to know what the environment is like up there? Unless it was nuttin' but net there had to be some damage, even minor, on the roof.

I wish there was a way to index the landing gear location to the WTC site and then plot the trajectory of the debris seen in the video.

Far as the roof tops go,there was probably a lot of junk on roofs around the immediate site.There will also probably be stuff still turning up for years to come and probably some stuff that was thrown away just because it wasn't instantly recognizable.

RPM22
04-29-2013, 01:58 PM
Regarding the temperature created by burning fuel, for a long time this was the 'experts' main line of defence, as they were insistent that steel couldn't be weakened this much just by burning fuel. I think it was last year that a gasoline tanker and trailer ran into a freeway support near San Francisco, and created such heat that firefighters couldn't get near it for some hours. The result was that even though the structural steel was encased/protected by very thick concrete, (earthquake resistance) much of this steel actually melted on site, leading to a complete rebuild of that structure.
The 'experts' were very quiet after that...

Richard in Los Angeles

iste double fuel truck carrying gasoline

wierdscience
04-29-2013, 02:04 PM
There is a huge difference both in the method of construction of the Empire State building and the amount of energy deposited by the aircraft in the collision. There was also the major difference in the amount of fuel present and the ensuing fire.

Yup,besides all the fuel in the planes look at all the crap in a typical cube farm office,most of which burns really well.There was a massive fuel load in those fires.

dp
04-29-2013, 02:09 PM
I wish there was a way to index the landing gear location to the WTC site and then plot the trajectory of the debris seen in the video.

51 Park Place, Manhattan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_Trade_Center,_NY_-_2001-09-11_-_Debris_Impact_Areas.svg

http://binged.it/ZghJkc

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/ground_zero_arial2_ort.jpg

51 Park Place is in the upper right quadrant - the building has some blue containers on the west side curb. It turns out this is not the only piece of landing gear to fall in the area.

Alistair Hosie
04-29-2013, 02:52 PM
Actually its a wheel blown up photographically from paddy O,Chookies wheelbarrow he's a well known scrap metal merchant in those parts of country The rope is or was a kind of brake paddy made to throw with an anchor round the nearest lampost to stop his little scrap barrow from sliding away with him .I am willing to bet up to four pence on it all inc cash gold. Alistair

DICKEYBIRD
04-29-2013, 03:21 PM
There is a huge difference both in the method of construction of the Empire State building and the amount of energy deposited by the aircraft in the collision. There was also the major difference in the amount of fuel present and the ensuing fire.Very true. I definitely wasn't trying to support those that claim the Towers shouldn't have fallen for some nefarious reason, just pointing out that they weren't the first tall buildings to ever be been hit by an airplane for those that didn't know.

I remember reading a detailed account of the Empire State Bldg. crash some years after the event and it was a horrifying event in itself but obviously nowhere near as bad as the WTC attack.:(

Weston Bye
04-29-2013, 05:47 PM
An example of how fast a structure can be weakened by fire.

http://www.break.com/usercontent/2007/4/23/freak-propane-truck-accident-on-i-69-in-flint-279583

A propane tanker crashed next to an overpass and burned it's entire payload in less than a minute. The overpass was damaged to the point that it had to be replaced.

Coincidently, a motorist was crossing the adjacent overpass in the opposite direction. Flames passed under the overpass and curled around and instantly burned the paint off the hood and roof of his car. The motorist was uninjured, however.

A gasoline tanker crashed under an overpass in Detroit that also ruined the overpass.

I recall seeing a news story about the WTC design that probably contributed to the catastrophic failure. Thie building just sort of unzipped.

Considering the mass of undamaged building above the crash sites, I doubt that there would be any other outcome.

wierdscience
04-29-2013, 09:21 PM
51 Park Place, Manhattan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_Trade_Center,_NY_-_2001-09-11_-_Debris_Impact_Areas.svg

http://binged.it/ZghJkc

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/ground_zero_arial2_ort.jpg

51 Park Place is in the upper right quadrant - the building has some blue containers on the west side curb. It turns out this is not the only piece of landing gear to fall in the area.

Ahh,neat illustration,figured that was the case.From the video it looked as though the pieces that made it all the way through were still moving upwards of 80-100mph. Since all the buildings around the towers were a good bit lower than the impact zone the piece traveled a distance about what would be expected.

Optics Curmudgeon
04-29-2013, 10:39 PM
Being familiar with the US government, I can say that it is impossible for a conspiracy that involves more than a very small number of people to A) succeed and B) stay secret for any length of time. Even Seal Team 6, one of many such groups that are usually quiet about what they do, had people that couldn't keep their mouth shut. The higher profile something is, the quicker the leaks start. Oswald killed Kennedy, live with it. A group of sociopaths hijacked four airliners and succeeded in flying three of them into buildings, live with it. It may be fun to imagine how a conspiracy unfolds, but that's for novels and movies. Except for Lincoln, that is......

Oh, and the gasoline tanker burned under the MacArthur Maze in 2007 (and it did collapse as a result).

winchman
04-29-2013, 11:02 PM
More details emerge: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/29/17974043-debris-near-wtc-site-idd-as-wing-piece-believed-to-be-from-911-jet?lite

The rope was already at the scene,and a detective used it to try to move the part.

J Tiers
04-30-2013, 12:28 AM
Being familiar with the US government, I can say that it is impossible for a conspiracy that involves more than a very small number of people to A) succeed and B) stay secret for any length of time. Even Seal Team 6, one of many such groups that are usually quiet about what they do, had people that couldn't keep their mouth shut.

Totally agree, as I mentioned. It's my best argument against any widespread conspiracy such as "mining" 3 large buildings with explosives and thermite.

The ONLY credible conspiracy theory is that a very small number of people, probably led by Dick Cheney, simply allowed the plot to go through. There is no "action" associated with that theory, it is a "lack of action", which is easy, deniable, has no "hero", and frankly is not distinguishable from normal government ineptness.

Total number of conspirators could be as low as 3 to 5 people.

In fact, the only "whistleblowing" possible has already occurred.... the analyst who mentioned that her report went nowhere said her piece, it was universally ignored, and likely the analyst in question has been fired and told to shut up and disappear. That sequence would be the exact same whether the report was ignored by deliberate action, or by pure government agency stupidity.

Weston Bye
04-30-2013, 05:52 AM
That sequence would be the exact same whether the report was ignored by deliberate action, or by pure government agency stupidity.


Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

...

Doc Nickel
04-30-2013, 06:15 AM
Being familiar with the US government, I can say that it is impossible for a conspiracy that involves more than a very small number of people to A) succeed and B) stay secret for any length of time.

-That was a point I've used extensively on the occasions I've stumbled or been dragged into a 9/11 arguments.

Like the "thermite" theory, apparently based on some air samples that detected some components of thermite, and the discovery of a pool of glowing-hot rubble in the lower layers.

The World Trade Centers were office buildings, housing hundreds of companies and thousands of employees. Being a World trade center, several of those offices operated on the time from their host countries, meaning that there was 'round-the-clock activity in the building. It didn't just close down at 5 PM.

The amount of thermite needed to do the devastation we saw, would have been on the order of tons, and would have had to have been spread very widely- many floors, hundreds of rooms. That would have required a team of several dozen people hauling around large boxes of material, construction tools since walls would have to be cut through in order to place the thermite, and so on.

So that's dozens of people to do the work, tens more to order it done, thousands that would have seen the people doing the work or even just milling around the office areas, and thousands more that would have spotted suspiciously-cut beams during the cleanup, or found timer/detonator/ignitor parts in the rubble (they literally sifted every single load that left the site.)

All of whom have kept completely, utterly silent for the past decade.

Considering that less than two years after the supposedly-doesn't-exist SeAL team waxed bin Laden we have at least three books and a movie about it- besides the fact that photos of the downed chopper were in the newspapers the very next day- I just don't see that as even remotely possible.

Doc.

vincemulhollon
04-30-2013, 07:58 AM
Well OK the near unanimous opinion is there's no engineering/construction/inspection coverup because being placed in a fire makes a steel structure instantly fail. You know, like my BBQ or a handful of other events that were picked and chosen out of many where three skyscrapers made by the same people around the same time didn't coincidentally fail. I don't think we're ever going to get agreement on that so may as well drop it. I would personally give it about 51% odds of being totally bogus and maybe 49% odds that the people that lie to us all the time when they discuss anything else, are actually telling the truth this time. Sometimes .gov people really do tell the truth, especially if they have nothing to gain from it, and a curious engineering debate isn't going to earn them any votes one way or another, so thats really the only reason I gave them such a high percentage possibility.

So back to building 3, that collapsed later, that was just too close and got roasted by #1 and #2 so it melted and failed also, but no other building in the area got roasted due to wind or magic or something. Or only building 3 was improperly designed/inspected/built so a mere BBQ next door could have made it collapse. The whole thing is just bogus but this is the most bogus part. Now I'll sit back and here anecdote after anecdote about how one time out of ten thousand fires a building across the street had its steel melt but not its neighbors so it collapsed. Personally I give the official account about 90% odds of being bogus and maybe 10% odds being true.

Bad batch of steel? A strange failure mode no one has modeled yet? Somebody got paid off to install something cheaper? Bet we'll never know but its going to be one of those three.

I would be inclined to think the engineering was OK. Remember about a decade earlier a pretty big bomb went off in the basement causing all kinds of devastation and it didn't collapse them, so all three, engineering, construction, and inspection must have done everything right in the basement. Maybe the suits said they had to start saving money once they had the thing built halfway up or something, so only half the bolts got installed or they started to cheap out on materials. Sounds perfectly believable without any space aliens or political science crazy ideas. The intense blind opposition to anything like that ever happening sounds like folks who've never built anything on a tightly enforced budget.

Ed P
04-30-2013, 08:10 AM
The ONLY credible conspiracy theory is that a very small number of people, probably led by Dick Cheney, simply allowed the plot to go through.

Credible, how so? Where are the facts to support such a claim? Just because someone throws out an accusation without facts to support it, does not make it "credible", at least to me.

Ed P

J Tiers
04-30-2013, 08:15 AM
Weston's point is well taken, but should be amended...... "Without more proof, do not declare something to be malicious when it can be explained by stupidity."

There is something about that "never" which ignores the inherent tendency towards "badness" that exists inside every single person, even inside you, if one just digs sufficiently past the surface.

vincemulhollon
04-30-2013, 08:41 AM
The World Trade Centers were office buildings, housing hundreds of companies and thousands of employees. Being a World trade center, several of those offices operated on the time from their host countries, meaning that there was 'round-the-clock activity in the building. It didn't just close down at 5 PM.

I also don't find teh thermite theory very likely. But to properly dismiss it, you have to be fair. You COULD do it the hardest possible way, as you described, involving as many people as possible with tons of movie plot style drama. But it would seem almost infinitely simpler to just figure out which support beams were critical (or just guess and over do it) then rent (or sublease) a small amount of office space just like a zillion other tenants and roll some filing cabinets full of "stuff" up against the beam and its all done. To make sure it goes off put a dead mans switch there... and use it on the big day.

Some rental agent knows a guy rented an office and died in it during the collapse, what does that prove, hes not exactly the only one. The dead mans switch ... did its thing, so the guy who rolled a filing cabinet into place isn't around anymore to tell any tales. Some office supply shop knows they sold a couple filing cabinets to a dude who died in the 9/11 tragedy, so what, I'm sure the bad guy wasn't the only guy at WTC to ever buy a filing cabinet. Some security guard saw a guy wheeling a heavy filing cabinet around, so what, paperwork, WTC, who ever would have guessed? This takes one crazy dude (well, technically two, if you assume both towers, or maybe three, but they don't have to cooperate or even know other agents are on the case). This infinitely more likely theory doesn't exactly require the cooperation of the vice president of the USA and a cast of hollywood hundreds.

This idea comes from my first intern job back when xerography was new and purchasing a blueprint from the manufacturer cost $100 each plus overnight shipping (now a days they probably have a free PDF ftp site or something on the internet) Anyway my job was to collect blueprints from all over a 200 acre shop and use this newfangled engineering photocopier to replicate a backup so at least in theory they'd save money and time by having the purchasing lady check my giant file cabinets containing, in theory, every print in the entire company. Needless to say she was fat and this was 3000 feet from her office so I basically wasted a lot of time and paper for something that was never used. So I spent an entire high school summer locked in a secured storage room just me, my cabinets, my photocopier, a giant in basket and out basket, and a radio (we didn't have CDs back then...). The interesting thing is despite being surrounded by about a thousand people outside the room, they had no idea what was in the cabinets in my little locked room or even what I was doing in there. And my cabinets and photocopier were arranged around an incredibly inconveniently located steel pillar that held up the building. I never transported or stored thermite in my file cabinets, but I did keep food and beverages in there (separate from the cabinets full of paper of course, I'm not a complete idiot). There were no bug or rodent problems and my not being a slob kept it that way, plus this was pretty high security like a vault so they couldn't get in! Anyway after the whacko stories about 9/11 and thermite came out, I realized I probably could, all by myself, as a teen kid have dropped that building. And in retrospect its probably dumb to have a paper print storage room with a structural steel support pillar running thru it. I don't think it even had a sprinkler in the room (which is probably illegal for an "office" but for a glorified storage room I guess its OK, or at least it was back then, or as discussed sometimes, what passes the inspector is not necessarily up to code...)

I would disregard that theory because its much more complicated than one day decades ago someone decided to save some money while building something and it worked just fine for about 30 years, until one day it didn't. I mean, what happens more often on a typical day like today, the vice president of the USA begins a crazy conspiracy, or one dude wheels around filing cabinets full of thermite, or some dude is a cheapskate when he shouldn't be? My suspicion is on the latter.