Mystery of WTC 7 - Conspiracy

[MooseBreath]

did you hear what was being said ? do you actually know how steel becomes "fused" together ?

show me an example of metal beams being fused together ( ie welded) using ordinary fire , you can even use jet fuel if you want , i'd love to see it .

i accept it's nothing directly to do with 7 but there shouldn't be any molten steel anywhere at the site.

I heard what was being said but anyone can say anything zingy, doesn't make it true.

[Zingari]

I heard what was being said but anyone can say anything zingy, doesn't make it true.

Oh deary me,  I was hoping to see lots of videos showing me how i could get steel beams to such high temps  they could fuse together using ordinary fire.

i'm very disappointed now . how could you do this to me at christmas moosey ? 

[sphericalfox]

Oh deary me,  I was hoping to see lots of videos showing me how i could get steel beams to such high temps( incandesent) they could fuse together using ordinary fire.

i'm very disappointed now . how could you do this to me at christmas moosey ? 

 

edit 

 

Zing you do realise you are wasting your time don't you? I hear what you are saying, and yet every time you've asked for an answer to a very simple question, it is ignored.

[Zingari]

So, the US government want to bring down WTC 7 as part of some broader plan to go to war. They have infinite resources and expertise to utilise but the best they can do is bring down the building in a way that is said to be entirely consistent with a controlled demolition. Right, I think I understand!

the who how and why is pretty well impossible to answer.

 

Zing you do realise you are wasting your time don't you? I hear what you are saying, and yet every time you've asked for an answer to a very simple question, it is ignored.

i don't really mind SF  I quite enjoy discussions like this , i accept i very well may be completely wrong , but if it gets people thinking about it and questioning authority rather than just accepting authority as truth , that's ok by me  :xmassmile:

[fleckneymike]

the who how and why is pretty well impossible to answer.

 

i don't really mind SF  I quite enjoy discussions like this , i accept i very well may be completely wrong , but if it gets people thinking about it and questioning authority rather than just accepting authority as truth , that's ok by me  :xmassmile:

 

could you provide any pictoral evidence of molten steel or pools of molten steel? Any at all?

 

What you have provided is a documentary from the History channel where people use the phrase molten metal and make use of idioms and hyperbole.

[shen]

could you provide any pictoral evidence of molten steel or pools of molten steel? Any at all?

 

What you have provided is a documentary from the History channel where people use the phrase molten metal and make use of idioms and hyperbole.

 

So the welded cross and huge lump of coalesced steel and debris in that video was just papermaché?

[MooseBreath]

Oh deary me, I was hoping to see lots of videos showing me how i could get steel beams to such high temps they could fuse together using ordinary fire.

i'm very disappointed now . how could you do this to me at christmas moosey ?

Why do I need to post a video proving this supposed molten steel when you are the one making the assertion? Surely if you're claiming something happened the onus is on you to provide evidence. So far you haven't.

But just to cheer you up in this festive season, here's a link that should make interesting reading:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911nutphysics.htm

[fleckneymike]

So the welded cross and huge lump of coalesced steel and debris in that video was just papermaché?

 

It is a cross beam from the WTC, it wasn't 'welded' together by fire. The 'lump' is not made of steel.

[shen]

So, the US government want to bring down WTC 7 as part of some broader plan to go to war. They have infinite resources and expertise to utilise but the best they can do is bring down the building in a way that is said to be entirely consistent with a controlled demolition. Right, I think I understand!

 

Yes, because the US government is a unified entity that isn't comprised of many small and opposing factions. It coordinates elaborate terrorist plans behind closed doors in unanimous secrecy. Use your other head, Mike!

[purpleronnie]

so no evidence of a conspiracy then?  Just admit it, you have nothing.

[shen]

It is a cross beam from the WTC, it wasn't 'welded' together by fire. The 'lump' is not made of steel.

 

So the part where the guy says the beams melted together from the intense heat should be disregarded?

 

That video and reports of molten steel could well be inaccurate. It could well be misinformation from contractors or whatever that were passed up to higher levels when uncertainty reigned. In fact, quite a lot of witness reports could all be made up or distorted. We just don't know, do we? You could ask for all the pictoral evidence of molten steel in the world, but would that ever make you reconsider your position? I find it very unlikely that you'll ever be open-minded or critical enough to consider there might be deliberate withholding/distortion of information when it comes to all the events of 9/11. At least I try to be open to alternative, 'non-conspiracy' theories and explanations, but so far they just do not add up or make for extremely implausible reading.

[shen]

so no evidence of a conspiracy then?  Just admit it, you have nothing.

 

And because 'you' have reports from NIST and the 9/11 Commission you have something?? Wow... the naïvety is baffling...

[purpleronnie]

And because 'you' have reports from NIST and the 9/11 Commission you have something?? Wow... the naïvety is baffling...

You lack of evidence is more so...

[fleckneymike]

So the part where the guy says the beams melted together from the intense heat should be disregarded? That video and reports of molten steel could well be inaccurate. It could well be misinformation from contractors or whatever that were passed up to higher levels when uncertainty reigned. In fact, quite a lot of witness reports could all be made up or distorted. We just don't know, do we? You could ask for all the pictoral evidence of molten steel in the world, but would that ever make you reconsider your position? I find it very unlikely that you'll ever be open-minded or critical enough to consider there might be deliberate withholding/distortion of information when it comes to all the events of 9/11. At least I try to be open to alternative, 'non-conspiracy' theories and explanations, but so far they just do not add up or make for extremely implausible reading.

 

Take a look at the 'cross' for yourself. It'll take you 2 seconds. It is a cross beam, the metal on the horizontal part of the beam is not steel. 

[shen]

You lack of evidence is more so...

 

Fair enough if you're not willing to ask questions. I hope your bubble is comfy.

[purpleronnie]

Fair enough if you're not willing to ask questions. I hope your bubble is comfy.

Ask questions is fine, presenting evidence is another.  You have none.  Nothing to do with living in a bubble.

[shen]

Take a look at the 'cross' for yourself. It'll take you 2 seconds. It is a cross beam, the metal on the horizontal part of the beam is not steel. 

 

Oh, never mind then. I actually misunderstood the whole cross thing. I didn't think it was the covering part of the cross he referred to as being molten on top of the beams.

[fleckneymike]

Oh, never mind then. I actually misunderstood the whole cross thing. I didn't think it was the covering part of the cross he referred to as being molten on top of the beams.

 

That's ok. If you'd like to take 2 more seconds you'll see there is no evidence of molten steel at ground zero either.

[shen]

Ask questions is fine, presenting evidence is another.  You have none.  Nothing to do with living in a bubble.

 

I'm glad you think that too. I never claimed to have any evidence, but I'm just baffled that some of you are satisfied with the so-called answers that have been provided by NIST and the 9/11 Commission. The fact I'm not satisfied with them leads me to question the very nature of these events.

That's ok. If you'd like to take 2 more seconds you'll see there is no evidence of molten steel at ground zero either.

 

See my previous reply.

[fleckneymike]

I'm glad you think that too. I never claimed to have any evidence, but I'm just baffled that some of you are satisfied with the so-called answers that have been provided by NIST and the 9/11 Commission. The fact I'm not satisfied with them leads me to question the very nature of these events.

 

See my previous reply.

 

I don't quite follow. The conspiracy is that there was molten steel at ground zero, my position is there is no evidence, your position seems to be 'but what if there was?'

 

If you, or anyone was able to provide evidence of molten steel it would make me wonder how it got there and what caused it to become molten. However when you are faced with evidence that there was no molten steel it has zero effect on your position.

[purpleronnie]

I'm glad you think that too. I never claimed to have any evidence, but I'm just baffled that some of you are satisfied with the so-called answers that have been provided by NIST and the 9/11 Commission. The fact I'm not satisfied with them leads me to question the very nature of these events.

 

See my previous reply.

Like I said nothing wrong with questioning them but until any proof is found then there's only one conclusion.

[MooseBreath]

I'm glad you think that too. I never claimed to have any evidence, but I'm just baffled that some of you are satisfied with the so-called answers that have been provided by NIST and the 9/11 Commission. The fact I'm not satisfied with them leads me to question the very nature of these events.

You're not satisfied with the reports, but you're yet to provide any legitimate evidence-backed reason why. You haven't provided one single conclusive piece of evidence that disproves any part of the final NIST report.

On top of that, the conspiracy on a higher level makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. There was simply no reason why anyone would have needed to go to the trouble of faking the collapse of WTC7.

So you've got neither they 'why', nor the 'how' in your favour. I consider myself quite open to the idea that the powers that be don't always tell us the truth. Infact I think there is a lot that goes on that we don't know about. And I get the appeal behind believing in a conspiracy like this, but the fact is that there is nothing, and there has never been anything that categorically proves any part of the conspiracy, and there has been an awful lot of absolute guff passed off as legitimate evidence. People have also made money out of pushing the conspiracy theories onto the masses.

You imply that people who don't believe the conspiracy theories are closed-minded and live in a "bubble", but it's really the steadfast conspiracy believers who won't open their eyes.

[shen]

You're not satisfied with the reports, but you're yet to provide any legitimate evidence-backed reason why. You haven't provided one single conclusive piece of evidence that disproves any part of the final NIST report.

On top of that, the conspiracy on a higher level makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. There was simply no reason why anyone would have needed to go to the trouble of faking the collapse of WTC7.

So you've got neither they 'why', nor the 'how' in your favour. I consider myself quite open to the idea that the powers that be don't always tell us the truth. Infact I think there is a lot that goes on that we don't know about. And I get the appeal behind believing in a conspiracy like this, but the fact is that there is nothing, and there has never been anything that categorically proves any part of the conspiracy, and there has been an awful lot of absolute guff passed off as legitimate evidence. People have also made money out of pushing the conspiracy theories onto the masses.

You imply that people who don't believe the conspiracy theories are closed-minded and live in a "bubble", but it's really the steadfast conspiracy believers who won't open their eyes.

 

I'll get back to you asap. What you're asking needs a bit more time.

[Mike Oxlong]

Yes, because the US government is a unified entity that isn't comprised of many small and opposing factions. It coordinates elaborate terrorist plans behind closed doors in unanimous secrecy. Use your other head, Mike!

Yes, because the US government is a unified entity that isn't comprised of many small and opposing factions. It coordinates elaborate terrorist plans behind closed doors in unanimous secrecy. Use your other head, Mike!

Oh right, so it was a turkey farmer from Kansas who owed the IRS a few dollars.That explains the incompetence then!

[Zingari]

It seems that most posters believe the official story of the collapse of WTC7  because of the so called "proof" offered by the NIST computer generated theory of progressive collapse. This is continually being offered up as absolute proof there was no possibity of  CD ( I only see it as "proof of  a possibility , but thats not the point here)

 

Genuine questions

Given that   the total collapse of a steel building was unprecented  and unquestionably resembles a CD , did you believe it was due to fire before the report came out , if so , why ?

Why did you believe the story between the years 2001 and 2008 before the report was  even published? What "proof" did you have then ?  

Surely if you believed  it collapsed due to fire between those years , you were believing something on no  evidence whatsover but merely believing what you were told.