The Titanic sinking conspiracy theory
- Thread starter lub0
- Start date
Possibly all the fuel would be stored in the basement. Also possibly it would be stored in tanks near the generators themselves (which may or may not have been in the basement) I don't know either way. Likewise I don't know the history of previous fires in the bldg. but suspect they were likely all localized grease fires or office fires (or something similar) that was easily extinguished (IF indeed there were ANY previous fires) I DO know with relative certainty that there were NO previous fires equal to a jetliner crashing into the bldg.
Military-grade thermite is far more violent than stuff you can make at home, also can't thermite be mixed with conventional cutting charges to get the effects of high velocity blast and high heat?
Also there is a theory that the WTC was built with the charges already in place from the get go.
Biker
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
About the gas supply and fuel pipes that could feed those kitchens Santaman2000 described. While serving in the retained section of the Kent Fire Service in the UK one of the first things we did on any attendance was to knock off the supply to any flammable gases or fuels. Any ruptures while the blokes were inside dealing withthe fire would be catastrophic. Domestic house often had meters and the vlave outside and each truck carried a master key for it, same with factories too. So on that basis I'm guessing any Fire-Fighter in NY would have got those valves turned off the moment he stepped into the lobby. Standard operational procedure.
Got a LOT of catching up on this thread to do but good to see it still going on and so courteously too.
Got a LOT of catching up on this thread to do but good to see it still going on and so courteously too.
i've been watching this unfold and chuckling to myself, it's so much like conversations i have with the missus........they go like this... 
me......hello dear, i'm going to buy a new car, a Skoda
her......why
me....they get very good write ups
her....by who
me..... motoring journalists
her.....that are in the pocket of the manufactures
me.....no dear, they are impartial
her.....how do you know
me....anyway, they are made by VAG these days so must be good
her...they won't use the same components though
me....i believe they do
her....how do you know
me.....read it somewhere
her....who wrote it
me....a motoring journalist
her....in the pocket of the manufactures
me....anyway, they are very good cars, honestly
her....how do you know
me....look, lots of people drive them, must be good
her....name 10
me....i don't know 10
her ...so you don't know 10 people that drive them, more like 1
me....yeah well maybe, but it's very reliable and ecomonical
her....how do you know, have you asked the one person you know
me.....come on dear, all the motoring press can't be wrong can they.
her....why not
God give me strength !
( i love her loads really ! )
me......hello dear, i'm going to buy a new car, a Skoda
her......why
me....they get very good write ups
her....by who
me..... motoring journalists
her.....that are in the pocket of the manufactures
me.....no dear, they are impartial
her.....how do you know
me....anyway, they are made by VAG these days so must be good
her...they won't use the same components though
me....i believe they do
her....how do you know
me.....read it somewhere
her....who wrote it
me....a motoring journalist
her....in the pocket of the manufactures
me....anyway, they are very good cars, honestly
her....how do you know
me....look, lots of people drive them, must be good
her....name 10
me....i don't know 10
her ...so you don't know 10 people that drive them, more like 1
me....yeah well maybe, but it's very reliable and ecomonical
her....how do you know, have you asked the one person you know
me.....come on dear, all the motoring press can't be wrong can they.
her....why not
God give me strength !
( i love her loads really !
)i've been watching this unfold and chuckling to myself, it's so much like conversations i have with the missus........they go like this...
me......hello dear, i'm going to buy a new car, a Skoda
her......why
me....they get very good write ups
her....by who
me..... motoring journalists
her.....that are in the pocket of the manufactures
me.....no dear, they are impartial
her.....how do you know
me....anyway, they are made by VAG these days so must be good
her...they won't use the same components though
me....i believe they do
her....how do you know
me.....read it somewhere
her....who wrote it
me....a motoring journalist
her....in the pocket of the manufactures
me....anyway, they are very good cars, honestly
her....how do you know
me....look, lots of people drive them, must be good
her....name 10
me....i don't know 10
her ...so you don't know 10 people that drive them, more like 1
me....yeah well maybe, but it's very reliable and ecomonical
her....how do you know, have you asked the one person you know
me.....come on dear, all the motoring press can't be wrong can they.
her....why not
God give me strength !
( i love her loads really !
Your other half sounds as though she'd suit this thread fine. Why not get her to join in? Which side do you think she'd take?
My own just thinks we are all mad going on about this. I've tried to explain that only half of the participants are actually barking but she's not convinced.
Oh well....
Do you mean the actual thermite used by armed services like in certain types of hand grenades.
Of do you mean this mystery Nano-thermite that no one else has ever heard of?
Nope.
2 entirely different principals and entirely different things.
Thermite is NOT an explosive
So they installed explosives before 1973 already planning for 2 planes to crash into them 28 years later.
The phrase cold blooded springs to mind.
After ludicrous.
If the buildings were wired for explosives why didn't they go off in 1993?
You guys also need to pull your resources and make your minds up.
As some of you are going on about people hearing explosives, while others are saying it was thermite that was used.
Thermite is pretty much silent, so you really need to stick to one theory rather than muddying the waters with several preposterous ones.
Your other half sounds as though she'd suit this thread fine. Why not get her to join in?
for the sake of the collective sanity of this forum ( and my own safety ) i could not inflict that on the gentle folk of this thread, the gnashing of dentures and angry pounding of keyboards would be heard above the gentle mutterings of dismay. The normally docile Hillbill would disapear into his shed and ruin the next batch of heat treatment in frustration, Santaman for all his polite comments would revert to the language and phrases of a docker, Biker, bless him, would never visit these shores again...... No my friends, i could'nt do it to you.
Sounds logical. Problem is I don't know enough about the gas supplies to a scyscraper. As I said it's a small city unto itself. I doubt if it's as simple as cutting off the gas to a normal building. Probably several different supply lines going in which might slow down the FD as they located plans/blueprints showing where they all are (Remember that before 911 no one ever concieved of the idea that the whole building would be ablaze) or alternatively even if it were a single supply line, it must be massive to supply the entire building (again, think small city) and even if they did locate and close the supply, that would still leave a very large quantity of gas already downstream of the valves.
And all this assumes that it was/is natural gas coming through a supply main; it could also be propane in storage tanks in the building (although I think that unlikely)
Last edited:
For some reason the 'gnashing of dentures' phrase brings to mind an old Dave Allen joke
She sounds terrifying - get her involved quick!
Because a plane crashed into the Empire State building in 1945, these buildings were specifically designed to withstand the impact of a plane crashing into them. So yes, the architects did plan for that. It's unlikely any explosives were installed then though.
The theories I have read suggest that the explosives were retro fitted after the 1993 bomb. Specifically to bring the building straight down in its own footprint, to minimise the mass destruction that would occur if they toppled over to the side. A sort of
bring it down "safely" before it falls over into other buildings kind of thinking!
I have to say, from a gov capable of "preemptive strike" wars and who holds the launch codes for half the worlds nukes and dozens of other shady ops, rigging a building with explosives as a "safety precaution" and keeping it "secret" doesn't fall outside the realms of possibility for me.
That said, the buildings may have been rigged, maybe because they stood up so long after the crash, the authorities thought they would stay up, just put the fires out, so didn't give the order to demolish, maybe thats where the traces of explosives come from. From the unexploded explosives the overconfident officials didn't set off!
Then they collapsed from the structural damage due to the plane crash. They collapsed from the top down, not from the bottom.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes there is such a thing as military grade thermite. The difference would most likely be a much finer grade of powder and additional additives, and better quality raw materials to begin with, much like the flashpowder used in commercial fireworks being nothing in comparison to the stuff used in military flashbang grenades and artillery simulation devices.
Obviously I know this from the clear distinction I made in the very sentence you quoted me on, so what made you think I didn't know the difference? Surely thermite could be added to the cutting charges for higher heat. Most likely thermite and explosives were used in combination.
Why is this ludicrous? How can anything be beyond reality when 9/11 was an inside job, oh I forgot, you still don't beleive it!
But good point on the 1993 bombing. I would imagine the shock wave from that would of detonated at least some of the charges.
The only thing that's important is to agknowledge the obvious; that 9/11 was an inside job. Discussing the method of demolition, how the charges were laid and all that stuff is interesting, but irrelevant, and there's no way to find out for sure anyway.
cbrfs is you can't believe 9/11 was an inside job then I put it to you that you are suffering from the psychological condition known as cognitive dissonance, which is a primary trait of the derogetory term "sheeple". I mean no offence, I just wish to help make you aware of the psychological reasons behind you not wanting to believe in the obvious truth in front of you. Just forget the small detail and watch the two towers fall in the way a controlled demolition would, as well as building 7. Any person of free unbound mind would immediately suspect controlled demolition upon viewing this, and their ensuing investigation would invariably convince them it was an inside job. This is the truth of the matter.
Last edited:
As i say are you talking about the thermite as currently used by the military, or are you conjuring up some new stuff like this supposed "nano-thermite"?
If you knew the difference then you would know that thermite will NOT work with explosives.
Your asking me why it would be ridiculous to build tower blocks with explosive in them.
I'm sorry but if you do not understand why that is ridiculous there is something fundamentally wrong with your thought process.
You are either trolling, bored or have a mental illness.
Which ever it is, i refuse to waste time debating something with anyone that truly believes entire sky scrapers are built with explosive demolition charges.
The sad thing is, i came into this debate with an entirely open mind.
You have had a few days to present everyone one of us with open minds with evidence, data, theories and ideas.
Yet every single one that's been bought up has been shot down with overwhelming evidence, experience and common sense.
I have absolutely no side here, i have absolutely no gain from believing one side or the other.
The fact remains though i watched 2 planes hit 2 of the worlds biggest sky scrapers.
I watched them burn and i watched them collapse.
But rather than believe my own eyes and hours and hours of reading on the subject, you expect me to believe some fairy tale plot with absolutely no evidence and no facts.
I don't believe in ghosts, i don't believe in Jesus Christ and i don't believe in any God.
So unless you can come up with good solid hard data you should refrain from dishing out insults and start to take a long hard look at yourself.
I have enjoyed reading and watching everyone's "evidence" up until now, to be honest many have been bordering on to wayyyyy over board ridiculous.
Sadly i left ridiculous behind after your last post and only feel pity and concern for you and your family.
All sarcasm and humour aside, for the sake of your loved ones, please seek help.
Thermite? Looking online the main purpertrator of this story is Professor Steven Jones . He claimed to have found traces of Thermite, however his employers a Brigham Young University kicked him out after he published his story, the main reasons for his sacking was
Jones's "hypotheses and interpretations of evidence were being questioned by scholars and practitioners" and had not been "submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review." source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Jones One of his later formed team thought the towers were bought down by "directed energy weapons"
"So what conclusions can you make? An EX professor who was "relieved of teaching duties" analyzed a sample and found elements consistent with the steel. " Not the best source here http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090601095914AAhe6lH but you get the general idea.
Jones's "hypotheses and interpretations of evidence were being questioned by scholars and practitioners" and had not been "submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review." source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Jones One of his later formed team thought the towers were bought down by "directed energy weapons"
"So what conclusions can you make? An EX professor who was "relieved of teaching duties" analyzed a sample and found elements consistent with the steel. " Not the best source here http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090601095914AAhe6lH but you get the general idea.
Your google foo is weak young padawan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nano-thermite
Potential uses
Historically, pyrotechnic or explosive applications for traditional thermites have been limited due to their relatively slow energy release rates. Because nanothermites are created from reactant particles with proximities approaching the atomic scale, energy release rates are far greater.[2]
MICs or Super-thermites are generally developed for military use, propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics. Research into military applications of nano-sized materials began in the early 1990s.[3] Because of their highly increased reaction rate, nanosized thermitic materials are being studied by the U.S. military with the aim of developing new types of bombs several times more powerful than conventional explosives.[4] Nanoenergetic materials can store more energy than conventional energetic materials and can be used in innovative ways to tailor the release of this energy. Thermobaric weapons are one potential application of nanoenergetic materials.[5]
[edit]
Last edited:
