well this is a bit of a refreshing change - its not often on the internet that you get an American being the rational critic and and a bunch of Brits sounding like paranoid folks on their way to the mid west. 
The Titanic sinking conspiracy theory
- Thread starter lub0
- Start date
Who says they haven't?
It may not have been on the news, but that doesn't mean someone didn't come over and tear Bush a new one
Difficult to say, the cruncher for me in that pic are the beams on the bottom left.
The varying angles of cut and way the cuts sweep would make me believe they were cut by hand.
Certainly not a shaped charge that's 100%.
Everyone has a blind eye when it comes to the plane hitting the pentagon. As no one saw a plane.
3 buildings collapse in their own footprint, one was never hit by an aircraft, yet behaved in an identical way to the ones that had. Never seen before or since.
2 planes apparently vapourize, no one saw them, no evidence visible of any aircraft. Damage caused too small to be caused by the planes said to hit it. Never seen before or since.
1 big stash of gold, directly under said buildings, seems to vanish. 220 million recovered, but not from the vaults of the buildings hit. Wheres the gold that was in those vaults?
Sorry mate but i have to keep you on point here as you were the one that bought up this "evidence" of thermite.
Have you read the report i linked to?
Do you agree that the report is fundamentally flawed from the collection and storage of the samples through to the findings?
The reason i'm trying to stay on 1 thing at a time is because shifting topics tends to be how most of these theories are perpetuated.
It's a little doubt here and then a little doubt 1 million miles away on something completely different.
I agree about the beams. In the pic with a few, i would agree that those are cut with a torch. Not the other though.
Back to the thermite thing. It HAS been used in demolitions. Demolitions of steel structures.
[h=1]Skyride Tower Felled by Melting Steel Legs[/h]Intense heat was employed by wrecking engineers in toppling the 3,000,000-pound east tower of the “Skyride,” a major attraction of Chicago's Century of Progress. Huge “overshoes” in the form of cupolas made of steel and lined with firebrick were constructed around two legs of the tower and filled with 1,500 pounds of thermite, a mixture of aluminum and iron oxide. When fired by electricity the thermite generated a temperature of more than 5,000 degrees about the two legs, melting the ten-foot sections almost instantly, causing the tower to tip and then to crash. A microphone attached to the tip of the tower broadcast the noise of the fall by radio, and the spectacle was viewed by a crowd estimated at more than 100,000. The west tower had been wrecked several weeks earlier with dynamite. The 628-foot twin towers, the cables which supported the cars passing between them and the elevators cost more than $1,750,000 to erect.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...mite&pg=PA657&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
Back to the thermite thing. It HAS been used in demolitions. Demolitions of steel structures.
[h=1]Skyride Tower Felled by Melting Steel Legs[/h]Intense heat was employed by wrecking engineers in toppling the 3,000,000-pound east tower of the “Skyride,” a major attraction of Chicago's Century of Progress. Huge “overshoes” in the form of cupolas made of steel and lined with firebrick were constructed around two legs of the tower and filled with 1,500 pounds of thermite, a mixture of aluminum and iron oxide. When fired by electricity the thermite generated a temperature of more than 5,000 degrees about the two legs, melting the ten-foot sections almost instantly, causing the tower to tip and then to crash. A microphone attached to the tip of the tower broadcast the noise of the fall by radio, and the spectacle was viewed by a crowd estimated at more than 100,000. The west tower had been wrecked several weeks earlier with dynamite. The 628-foot twin towers, the cables which supported the cars passing between them and the elevators cost more than $1,750,000 to erect.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...mite&pg=PA657&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
I'm not a Brit so I won't complain but I can see why you might
We should look at the good points about this thread. I think that the discussion is remarkably polite and good-humoured. I don't agree with the opinions of the conspiracy theorists posting in this thread but on the whole they've been remarkably polite and calm about the way they've argued their case. HillBill and Biker both seem to respond with humour when pokes have been taken at their points of view and I certainly respect that.
If the posters in this thread hadn't been so courteous I probably wouldn't have hung around for so long.
No point getting wound up about a difference of opinion, if we tried hard enough we could find loads of em.
The mods too have allowed this thread to continue with no warning being issued, that alone is a testmony to the good naturedness of it.
I'm not a Brit so I won't complain but I can see why you might
We should look at the good points about this thread. I think that the discussion is remarkably polite and good-humoured. I don't agree with the opinions of the conspiracy theorists posting in this thread but on the whole they've been remarkably polite and calm about the way they've argued their case. HillBill and Biker both seem to respond with humour when pokes have been taken at their points of view and I certainly respect that.
If the posters in this thread hadn't been so courteous I probably wouldn't have hung around for so long.
No point getting wound up about a difference of opinion, if we tried hard enough we could find loads of em.
Agreed!
Don't normally read these type of threads....I doubt that any are fake, certainly not titanic or any comspiracy re 9/11 Moon landing maybe.....But there is a ship on the bottom of the ocean and the twin towers no longer exist... just saying.
My mistake then i apologise.
I will rewrite my post from:
To:
Do you agree that the findings the report on the rubble is fundamentally flawed?
In all honesty i've not read it yet. Its bookmarked for later tonight though.
Ive got to go out now for a couple of hours, I'll read it when i come home so i will answer your question then if thats ok with you?
Ive got to go out now for a couple of hours, I'll read it when i come home so i will answer your question then if thats ok with you?
I'm not a Brit so I won't complain but I can see why you might
We should look at the good points about this thread. I think that the discussion is remarkably polite and good-humoured. I don't agree with the opinions of the conspiracy theorists posting in this thread but on the whole they've been remarkably polite and calm about the way they've argued their case. HillBill and Biker both seem to respond with humour when pokes have been taken at their points of view and I certainly respect that.
If the posters in this thread hadn't been so courteous I probably wouldn't have hung around for so long.
I'd actualy go farther than just calling opposing viewers/participants "courteous." I think we've actually had fun with this topic; I know I have. Even on the points where we disagree, there's an incredible compulsion to keep reading. Just as the same compulsion keeps us watching the conspirator theory shows and the debunker shows.
Not a lot of feedback from a video link I posted so here is the same show on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVnQPGE36P4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVnQPGE36P4&feature=related
Nice find.
Started watching it but the quality was crap so i'm downloading now instead to watch later.
Yes, I must admit to looking forward to this one each day with the same pleasure I used to feel for debates as a youth. The whole thing has been fun. Even the insults have been amusing.
Ok, i've read it. I see your point about when and who collected the samples and also the time between sample collection and analysis.
It doesn't help the case he is trying to prove. It adds variables where it'd be better without them, for example, are the samples "as is" from the day of collection or have they been played with? Or indeed, are they from 9/11 at all ?
But at the same time, it doesn't make the results incorrect either. It just makes it harder to make it stand with credibility.
It hasn't changed my mind, but i will now have that slight element of doubt.
It still doesn't explain the other stuff pointed out though.
Last edited:
Well, lets keep it up then seeing as though were all enjoying ourselves
15 pages and 436 posts in 4 days, is that a record?
JFK next?
Last edited:
Okay, so having watched hours of youtube footage of the collapse of the WTC, both amateur shot and from film crews, i have changed my mind!
I still cant explain some of the "sliced" columns, but after watching footage of various controlled demolitions, this one for example:
[video=youtube;hdqWRHe4AKs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdqWRHe4AKs[/video]
It seems clear to me that when the bottom support structure is blown out/removed, the whole building compresses from the bottom, under the weight of the falling building above.
In the case of both towers at the WTC, the collapse starts at the top, where the fires were burning. On some footage, you can even see the top collapse onto the still standing stationery bottom sections.
There is a vast amount of material available here and many pics videos to download:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/index.html#building7
After research, building 7 looks more like a demolition job though!
There are also loads of pictures of the pentagon, both inside & out. Although there is some small pieces of what looks like wreckage, to me there doesn't seem to be either enough of it, or enough damage to the building for a big jumbo to have hit it - more like a Lear or something...
I still cant explain some of the "sliced" columns, but after watching footage of various controlled demolitions, this one for example:
[video=youtube;hdqWRHe4AKs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdqWRHe4AKs[/video]
It seems clear to me that when the bottom support structure is blown out/removed, the whole building compresses from the bottom, under the weight of the falling building above.
In the case of both towers at the WTC, the collapse starts at the top, where the fires were burning. On some footage, you can even see the top collapse onto the still standing stationery bottom sections.
There is a vast amount of material available here and many pics videos to download:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/index.html#building7
After research, building 7 looks more like a demolition job though!
There are also loads of pictures of the pentagon, both inside & out. Although there is some small pieces of what looks like wreckage, to me there doesn't seem to be either enough of it, or enough damage to the building for a big jumbo to have hit it - more like a Lear or something...
