Is it any wonder that there are so many conspiracy theories?
In a recent Channel Five documentary, two scientists believe they have been able to provide a plausible explanation as to how the twin towers collapsed on 9/11.
They say that the aluminium from the plane lodged in the building would have heated up enough to explode and weaken the structure of the tower when it came into contact with water from the sprinklers (aluminium heats up much faster than steel).
The scientists asked NIST for permission to take a sample of the aircraft to test their theory but NIST wouldn't allow them access to the site where the wreckage from the towers is held.
Why don't NIST or the powers that be allow the scientists to test samples of wreckage so they might debunk 'inside job' theories once and for all?
Well, NIST has said that the planes disintegrated and didn't lodge themselves in the building like the scientists suggested. So, we are no further forward in solving the 9/11 conspiracy mysteries while the scientists are unable to prove their theory is correct.
Whatever the truth about 9/11, NIST still have a lot of explaining to do.
Did the planes disintegrate or didn't they?
Why does NIST not allow access to the wreckage?
What has NIST/US administration got to hide?
They say that the aluminium from the plane lodged in the building would have heated up enough to explode and weaken the structure of the tower when it came into contact with water from the sprinklers (aluminium heats up much faster than steel).
The scientists asked NIST for permission to take a sample of the aircraft to test their theory but NIST wouldn't allow them access to the site where the wreckage from the towers is held.
Why don't NIST or the powers that be allow the scientists to test samples of wreckage so they might debunk 'inside job' theories once and for all?
Well, NIST has said that the planes disintegrated and didn't lodge themselves in the building like the scientists suggested. So, we are no further forward in solving the 9/11 conspiracy mysteries while the scientists are unable to prove their theory is correct.
Whatever the truth about 9/11, NIST still have a lot of explaining to do.
Did the planes disintegrate or didn't they?
Why does NIST not allow access to the wreckage?
What has NIST/US administration got to hide?
I should make a correction to some of the above: I said the scientists were refused permission from NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) to allow access to the wreckage.
What I should have said is that the New York Port Authority wouldn't allow access to any of the wreckage material in their land-fill site.
It may well be that NIST or the 'powers that be' imposed that restriction on the Port Authority in the first place but I haven't read of anything to back that up.
What I should have said is that the New York Port Authority wouldn't allow access to any of the wreckage material in their land-fill site.
It may well be that NIST or the 'powers that be' imposed that restriction on the Port Authority in the first place but I haven't read of anything to back that up.
Well..not wishing to be led by conspiracy theories....
but....
I struggle to see how those 2 buildings collapsed so evenly, pretty much perfectly vertically, when even our Fred Dibnah might struggle to achieve the same with a chimney...!
but....
I struggle to see how those 2 buildings collapsed so evenly, pretty much perfectly vertically, when even our Fred Dibnah might struggle to achieve the same with a chimney...!
Quote:I struggle to see how those 2 buildings collapsed so evenly, pretty much perfectly vertically, when even our Fred Dibnah might struggle to achieve the same with a chimney...!
They collapsed from the top, meaning, obviously, that each floor fell vertically downwards onto the one below, becoming heavier all the time.
Disposing of a chimney is usually done by detonating charges at the bottom. Unless they're placed and activated quite precisely, one side will fall sooner than the other.
Quote:Well..not wishing to be led by conspiracy theories....
but....
I struggle to see how those 2 buildings collapsed so evenly, pretty much perfectly vertically, when even our Fred Dibnah might struggle to achieve the same with a chimney...!
Yes. I feel like Detective Columbo - scratching his head as he is just about to leave saying "something bothers me" about this.
I mean, I've only mentioned one instance where an enquiry about access to information or examination of wreckage from 9/11 was rejected but there are so many more instances of refusal for access according to what I've read.
Of course, there are many conspiracy theories going round about all sorts of things which are patently bonkers but the authorities have only themselves to blame if people don't believe them. Then again, it is quite likely that a number of conspiracy theories are actually encouraged or started by the 'powers that be'.
Quote:Disposing of a chimney is usually done by detonating charges at the bottom. Unless they're placed and activated quite precisely, one side will fall sooner than the other.
Yup..agree..so how did the World Trade Towers fall/concertina so precisely, perfectly vertically...?
Quote:so how did the World Trade Towers fall/concertina so precisely, perfectly vertically...?[/quote
Did you read the rest of my post?
Almost all events which attract conspiracy theories are not conspiracies but due to incompetence. When viewed in hindsight, it is easy to say surely they must have known or how could several people make such errors but it happens all the time.
From a course on architecture, the problems with the twin towers was explained. It was a fundamental design error which was common at that time ( the designers had not considered a disaster of this kind). Recent tall buildings have been designed differently based on lessons learned from the twin towers. One of the course presenters was involved in the design of the Shard which addresses the lessons learned. This suggests to me that the information was shared with the right folks even if some nosy attention seeking reporters cannot get access to the wreckage.
Dave
From a course on architecture, the problems with the twin towers was explained. It was a fundamental design error which was common at that time ( the designers had not considered a disaster of this kind). Recent tall buildings have been designed differently based on lessons learned from the twin towers. One of the course presenters was involved in the design of the Shard which addresses the lessons learned. This suggests to me that the information was shared with the right folks even if some nosy attention seeking reporters cannot get access to the wreckage.
Dave
Quote:Almost all events which attract conspiracy theories are not conspiracies but due to incompetence. When viewed in hindsight, it is easy to say surely they must have known or how could several people make such errors but it happens all the time.
From a course on architecture, the problems with the twin towers was explained. It was a fundamental design error which was common at that time ( the designers had not considered a disaster of this kind). Recent tall buildings have been designed differently based on lessons learned from the twin towers. One of the course presenters was involved in the design of the Shard which addresses the lessons learned. This suggests to me that the information was shared with the right folks even if some nosy attention seeking reporters cannot get access to the wreckage.
Dave
Yeah you would say that, but you work for the CIA
Or is it the Deep CIA, everything's Deep these days.
Sometimes there is no point trying to explain something when the audience is only interested in hearing echos of their own thoughts and opinions. This applies to most conspiracy theories where the true believers have already made up their mind and have discounted the obvious conclusions. That the obvious reason for the collapse was seen on TV by millions of people and rebroadcast so many times that it is seared in the consciousness of every American is obviously irrelevant. I suppose that is why we still have people who confess the earth is flat and climate change is a hoax.
Quote:the earth is flat and climate change is a hoax.
You mean they're not . . . ?
Quote:Some believe that two innocent Russian tourists were fall guys for the Salisbury novichok carry on.
Most people believe that novichok was used and then we hear that a tiny amount of novichok kills almost instantly. If that is the case then novichok was clearly not used against the Skripals.
As I said: You can't blame people for developing conspiracy theories when they are fed with such blatant lies.
Either the 'powers that be' are grossly incompetent or they are lying propagandists. Take your pick.
Quote:
Either the 'powers that be' are grossly incompetent or they are lying propagandists. Take your pick.
Do you ever believe anybody?
If I told you that today is Saturday, which, incidentally, it is, you'd find a (deep) reason to call me a liar.
Quote:That the obvious reason for the collapse was seen on TV by millions of people and rebroadcast so many times that it is seared in the consciousness of every American is obviously irrelevant. I suppose that is why we still have people who confess the earth is flat and climate change is a hoax.
Yes but what was not obvious, according to expert engineers, is the manner in which the towers fell - with barely any resistance.
Now I'm not saying what I believe because I'm not an expert.
I would plump for the theory of the two scientists who believe that super heated, exploding aeroplane aluminium was responsible because that might explain how the metal supports melted. However, as I said before, NIST say the planes disintegrated and the N.Y. Port Authority won't allow access for these scientists to test samples of the aircraft of any other wreckage.
This is nothing to do with belief in conspiracy theories: It's a question of why are these scientists not allowed access to material that might explain why the towers collapsed in the way they did?
I might add that NIST have scores of other questions that remain unanswered or surrounded by obfuscation.
