Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(911Blogger)   Panicky 9/11 truth nutjobs debate Oakland gas tanker incident, see their WTC conspiracy theories collapse as quickly as that highway did   ( 911blogger.com) divider line
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

19551 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Apr 2007 at 3:55 PM (10 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



589 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2007-04-30 08:13:06 PM  
FritzyvonFritz

Baaaaaa.
 
2007-04-30 08:14:54 PM  
chiark: You however are claiming that the government always lies, no matter what.

I don't recall ever claiming that. My whole point was to point out the error of accepting as irrefutable fact the official story as told by government officials.

After all, 50-60% of Americans still believe that Saddam had something to do with the 9/11 attacks. Gullability here is fairly rampant.
 
2007-04-30 08:15:55 PM  
I joked when we saw this on the news that someone without any idea what a fire over time can do to concrete and the fixtures would claim something nefarious was happening.

I'm only heartened so far that even the bloggers aren't taking the idea seriously. These things usually take time, so we'll see in 2 years.
 
2007-04-30 08:16:47 PM  
cryptozoophiliac: You left out the part about Habeas Corpus being trashed, and how US citizens can now be detained by the government without charges or legal counsel indefinitely.

But that's not the point here, the point is: OMG look at the conspiracy nutjobs run because a road collapsed 1!!!!


So as a conspiracy nutjob, you are upset that people are distracted from real issues by conspiracy nutjobs?
 
2007-04-30 08:16:47 PM  
Staypuft_Mushmallow_Manz

You have it all wrong....it was Chewie. He was the power behind the power of the thrown. I mean after he died look at how quickly the New Republic collapsed.

Never trust a wookie...if given a chance he will kill you and everything you care about.
 
2007-04-30 08:17:56 PM  
Like many others, I do not believe in the conspiracy theories, but I don't rule them out. That said, was the freeway built to withstand such an intense gas fire? I believe the WTC was built to withstand planes flying into it. I see this as a hole in the analogy.
 
2007-04-30 08:18:37 PM  
IED's for everyone....yeah...fark americans i'm sick of all of you I'm gonna fark shiat up.....
 
2007-04-30 08:19:57 PM  
and to think I thought he was killed because he was about to come clean...
 
2007-04-30 08:23:01 PM  
Google up the Fulton Road Bridge in Cleveland, Ohio.

They just tried blowing it up on the 28th. They FAILED.

Explosives don't work! Fire does!


On serious note, molten steel is yellowish-white. Red hot is only in the 600-800deg range. Glowing red steel can be bent easily by hand...

/melts steel with hydrocarbon fire all the time
//meet my friends Oxygen and Acetylene (C2H2)
 
2007-04-30 08:23:15 PM  
They was designed withstand small planes impacts. Not a half loaded 767.

And at the time they were built they had Asbestos (SP) insulation around those steel supports. Those where taken out in the mid 80's or 90's. That would have made those steel supports much more vulnerable to fire as well as intense heat. I might be wrong but Asbestos is still the best fire insulation around right.
 
2007-04-30 08:25:08 PM  
asbestos works well for that, yeah. German soldiers used asbestos pads to swap barrels out of their MG-42s, and a little pad of it was enough that the red-hot metal wouldn't burn them.
 
2007-04-30 08:25:43 PM  
wait! rephrase that! NAZIS use asbestos! thread godwinned and we can all go home! YAY!
 
2007-04-30 08:27:16 PM  
hah, wow this is the first thing i though of when i heard that it collapsed from the heat
/damn theorists
 
2007-04-30 08:33:07 PM  
I really enjoy the argument that, because he benefited from 9/11, Bush must have caused it.

Osama had a history of attacking the US, and 9/11 was used as a great propaganda victory in killing a lot of Americans. He used 9/11 to bait the US into two wars, tarnish the US's image abroad, get more donations from radical supporters and greatly increase recruiting. Clearly he was behind it all.

Hamid Karzai was a former Taliban supporter. After falling out of power with the organization (and thus out of power in the Afghan government), he needed a regime change if he wanted to take over again. Conveniently, the US just happened to invade and help his small group of fighters take over the country. Because of 9/11 he went from a two-bit warlord to the most powerful man in the government. Clearly he was behind it all.

The State of Texas has many defense-oriented industries (missiles, airplanes, etc) and a large number of military bases, all of which just happened to get large increases in funding after 9/11. All of the married soldiers who receive combat pay are sending the money home where it is spent by their wives and children, thus helping small businesses in the state. Moreover, Texas governor Rick Perry graduated from Texas A&M, a school where he could have learned about collapsing things and the use of fire as entertainment. Clearly he was behind it all.

Commercial Landlords in the City of New York benefited greatly from 9/11. Once the WTC collapsed, a enormous amount of office space was lost and many companies were forced to lease space in other buildings. Not only did these landlords get increased rents as a result of 9/11, but they would also know about buildings and stuff, and could easily plant explosions to destroy them. Also, NYC landowners have a disproportionate number of Republicans (skilled at lying), Japanese (skilled at sneak attacks) and Jews (skilled at pure evil). Clearly they were behind it all.

Dylan Avery was just an anonymous douchebag before 9/11. He "conveniently" happened to notice all of the "holes" in the "official" "story." Of the millions of people who witnessed 9/11, only he was smart enough to come up with these facts. Which is more likely, that he happened upon facts that others missed, or that he planted these inconsistencies so that he could later catapult himself to fame when he revealed them to the world in his movie? Of all of the other people mentioned, only this guy managed to go from being a nobody to being a minor quazi-celebrity. He gained more from 9/11 than anyone else and, given his extensive knowledge of physics, engineering and metallurgy, he was smart enough to pull it off. Clearly he was behind it all.

/wake up sheeple
 
2007-04-30 08:34:40 PM  
rush22: Hey stupid conspiracy theorists: stop asking questions about 9/11.

they don't ask questions, they just think they have all of the answers.
 
2007-04-30 08:35:23 PM  
i hope for your sake that that's all trolling.
 
2007-04-30 08:47:21 PM  
jedimk: That said, was the freeway built to withstand such an intense gas fire? I believe the WTC was built to withstand planes flying into it. I see this as a hole in the analogy.

Depends on the plane, doesn't it? And anything can be built to withstand fire, the question is always "how long and how hot?" Even safes are rated at a certain temperature for a certain period of time, and absent their function of protecting their contents at all cost - they'd be considered overkill if used in other design criteria. It's the "black box" argument: why not build the plane like that? Easy answer: because it wouldn't fly.

Those where taken out in the mid 80's or 90's. That would have made those steel supports much more vulnerable to fire as well as intense heat. I might be wrong but Asbestos is still the best fire insulation around right.

I believe the actual story is that the upper floors were blasted with non-asbestos fire proof material since powdered asbestos material was outlawed during their construction. I'll see if I can find the link. Regardless, it's fairly certain the fireproofing on the impact floors, asbestos or not, was blown off as the disintegrating plane made its way through the building.
 
2007-04-30 08:47:32 PM  
Some people want to see a conspiracy in everything as long as it's not their political party.
 
2007-04-30 08:48:34 PM  
liverhooligan

Question:

Admittedly, I've been out of touch for a while, however, I recall opponents to the war in Iraq saying that it was all about lowering gas prices by taking over the lucrative Iraqi fields and putting more oil in the supply?

Why then did I just pay $2.87 today to fill up?


If you filled up for $2.87, then I'm impressed. 93 is currently $3.09-3.19 in Ohio, and my Mazda swallows 15-16 gallons of it per fill up.

Either you have a really, really small tank, or fuel is about a quarter a gallon where you live!
 
2007-04-30 08:59:16 PM  
very simple truth from fire sciences classes and building construction for the fire service a steel beam at 1000 F will not support it's own weight. it doesnt have to melt, it loses it's strength, expands, sags and causes whatever it was supporting to collapse, be it a tall skyscraper or a freeway overpass no evil conspiracy or government coverup, just simple physics
 
2007-04-30 09:04:29 PM  
img256.imageshack.us
 
2007-04-30 09:05:23 PM  
liverhooligan

Well, I recall supporters of the war saying it would be over in weeks and our troops would be "lovebombed" and we would find those WMDs. These weren't random people, either, these were major pundits and administration officials on TV EVERY DAY. How did that work out again?

I never heard a single dirty hippie say anything about lowering gas prices. I did hear them talking about "war for oil", which I think means control of the oil. Like an idiot, I laughed at them. Well, they seem to have been kinda right. That reminds me, the neocons also said that that oil would pay for the reconstruction of Iraq. How did that part work out?
 
2007-04-30 09:05:25 PM  
RE: Asbestos link.

Found one that wasn't either: a) a conspiracy web site complaining about asbestos dust in the wreckage or b) Stephen Milloy, who does not carry a whole lot of scientific cred, even if he manages to point out something useful every once in a while.

It's from Scientific American, and these people are not "Popular Science" or "Popular Mechanics". I still frequently have to do outside research on my own just to understand what the hell they are writing about in some of their issues. The article was written a month after the attacks, and it doesn't make a claim as to whether asbestos would have helped or not, just that it didn't cover all of one tower and was removed and replaced after the 1993 bombings.

Some have raised questions about the degree of fire protection available to guard the structural steel. According to press reports, the original asbestos cementitious fireproofing applied to the steel framework of the north tower and the lower 30 stories of the south were removed after the 1993 terrorist truck bombing. (pops)

The question about asbestos still hasn't been answered, and likely can never be unless someone tries this again. I'm one of those hoping no one does.
 
2007-04-30 09:12:44 PM  
Evidently, US-made steel will flow like water at about 500 F.
 
2007-04-30 09:14:09 PM  
Credit to the DUmmie that said it first. Fire may melt steel, but it'll never melt tin foil.....
 
2007-04-30 09:16:33 PM  
You don't need the fire to melt the metal, just soften it a bit. And steel starts softening long before it melts. In a structure, namely a stressed structure, it takes very little softening to cause structural failure. When tensile strength goes from a 10 tons per square inch to 8 tons, bad things will happen. Like bridge fall down and go boom. Ditto a tall building.
 
2007-04-30 09:20:20 PM  
studebaker hoch: Evidently, US-made steel will flow like water at about 500 F.

Uh no. But it well start to soften at a slightly warmer temperature.
 
2007-04-30 09:22:06 PM  
Bacontastesgood: These weren't random people, either, these were major pundits and administration officials on TV EVERY DAY. How did that work out again?

Dude,

Get Tenet's book. He does a pretty good job of outlining how many people were ignored in the run-up. As someone who bought the war story precisely because it didn't seem possible that so many people could fark up all at once, it turns out only a few key people need to be committed to farking up, and there you go. And not in the "conspiracy theory way", but regular old hubris that makes one person in charge think they know better than anyone else who reports to them.

This is particularly true if one of those people is Rumsfeld, who did what any rational person would do if a 4 star general with 30-40 years of experience disagreed with you: he forced them into retirement. IMHO, we should be recruiting those experienced military personnel to write for our papers, since the press seemed to miss this watershed event for what it was at the time, and how else are we going to find out? Congress didn't let us know, but I seriously doubt they were working that hard on it.

I never heard a single dirty hippie say anything about lowering gas prices. I did hear them talking about "war for oil", which I think means control of the oil.

Not necessarily the same, but I heard both arguments at the time - we either needed the oil because we didn't want Iraqis to have control of their own money, or because joe schmoe with an SUV couldn't afford to fill up if we didn't take the oil and give it cheap to our own people. Or that we were tired of the French and Russians realizing a benefit from the "Oil for food" program. Choose your poison, all the arguments were made from both sides.

Guess what? At this point in time, we've all lost. We don't have cheaper oil, people are dead regardless, and no one controls the oil. I suppose we screwed over the French, but is that really a benefit?
 
2007-04-30 09:24:57 PM  
studebaker hoch: Evidently, US-made steel will flow like water at about 500 F.

No, but any steel will weaken over time when exposed to a constant source of heat. Steel can also structurally fail when exposed to extreme cold over time, regardless of where it is made.
 
2007-04-30 09:32:52 PM  
I think studebaker hoch's comment about "{steel flowing like water" was in reference to the pools of molten steel at the site. Because the WTC was made only of steel and contained nothing else at all that could have possibly melted. Nothing.
 
2007-04-30 09:33:21 PM  
EvolveYouPutz: So, let me see if I have this straight:

Bush & Friends can't even get away with firing 8 lawyers without news of it being turning into a national scandal.

But...Bush & Friends are savvy enough to orchestrate the most diabolical plot in our history, killing thousands, and nobody among the thousands of people that would've been involved in this elaborate plot has opened their yap to anyone, anywhere. Oh yeah, and if Bush & Friends are so good at hoaxing people, why didn't we "find" any WMD's in Iraq? If they could kill over 3,000 people on our own soil it wouldn't be hard to plant a small nuke in a bunker near Baghdad and call it Saddam's.

Right. Look folks, I hate Bush too. That doesn't mean that I surrender my logic at the same time. Look at the reaction to Hurricane Katrina and tell me that "the gubmint" is really on top of things. Bush, and everyone that works for him is too stupid to pull something like this off.


But you have to remember they let those other things get caught to further the cover up!

Yeah these people are stupid and there is no point arguing with them so I quit a long time ago. I made my GF's sister cry calling her a farking idiot at a family function when she spouted this shiat. When I was told to apologize I just told her anyone that stupid doesnt deserve any pity.
 
2007-04-30 09:38:14 PM  
Look, this sucker right here:

www.prisonplanet.com

Burned all night long, from top to bottom and didn't collapse. Hotter and longer and more involved than WTC.

WTF is with our steel? Are *all* US steel structures this weak when exposed to heat?
 
2007-04-30 09:38:43 PM  
steamingpile

What you just posted, could be the dumbest thing
ever posted anywhere!
 
2007-04-30 09:48:37 PM  
The melting point of steel argument is a red herring.

Steel doesn't have to completely melt before it fails catastrophically. Apparently heating it to 50 - 70% of the melting point will do it when there's sudden change in the load.

And there's no guarantee that the steel they actually got from the supplier wasn't a cheaper grade than what they paid for.

You're talking NYC Unions here, don't forget.
 
2007-04-30 09:53:08 PM  
studebaker hoch
Look, this sucker right here:
Burned all night long, from top to bottom and didn't collapse. Hotter and longer and more involved than WTC.
WTF is with our steel? Are *all* US steel structures this weak when exposed to heat?


Perhaps this will answer that question.

Basically, not only was the Madrid fire in a much shorter building (106 meters vs. 415 meters), it wasn't rammed with a high-speed projectile or doused with a jet fuel.
 
2007-04-30 09:58:00 PM  
Mercutio74: "/Btw, that's the empire state building after being hit by a B-52... it didn't fall down"

Obviously everyone coming down on M74 has managed to forget that dark day when a B-52 struck the ES Building. Equally obviously an inside job.
Looks like they got to everyone else on Fark!!
www.stealthputter.com

/"Anyone seen Major Kong?"
 
2007-04-30 10:01:55 PM  
studebaker hoch: Burned all night long, from top to bottom and didn't collapse. Hotter and longer and more involved than WTC.

WTF is with our steel? Are *all* US steel structures this weak when exposed to heat?


Wow owned in 3 posts, is that some sort of a record?

WahWahWeWah: What you just posted, could be the dumbest thing
ever posted anywhere!


Thank you, now go straighten your tin foil hat cause half my post was quoted little miss smart guy.
 
2007-04-30 10:02:16 PM  
Snarfangel

The North WTC tower wasn't hit all that far down from the top. The loading was about the same, plus or minus a dozen floors?

The impact cutting columns mattered. The dousing with jet fuel didn't matter when compared to the Madrid building, the Madrid building burned all night long compared to the WTC going down like a cheap card table after about an hour.

I would bet (no basis, this is out of my ass just based on looks) that the madrid fire was hotter, and spread out over a bigger area.

And yet, no earth-shattering kaboom?

The WTC got lit faster, the Madrid tower burned hotter, longer and over a bigger area.

pretty pictures
 
2007-04-30 10:06:00 PM  
Mercutio74:hit by a B-52

B-25: Empty weight: 21,120 lb ; Maximum speed: 275 mph

B-52: Empty weight: 185,000 lb ; Maximum speed: 560 knots

Big difference there, 9/11 blogger.
 
2007-04-30 10:06:44 PM  
HAY! Has anyone told Mercutio74 that it was a B-25 yet?
 
2007-04-30 10:08:02 PM  
studebaker hoch
I would bet (no basis, this is out of my ass just based on looks) that the madrid fire was hotter, and spread out over a bigger area.


From a quick Google, it looks like the peak temperature in the Windsor Tower fire was 800 C. For the WTC, it was between 900 and 1000 C.
 
2007-04-30 10:08:44 PM  
studebaker hoch

Yeah, completely overlook the part about the differences in structural the engineering between the two buildings.

It's not important.
 
2007-04-30 10:10:25 PM  
Worse still, ALL the B-52s hitting at the same time:

www.abc.net.au

thunkthunkthunkthunk


ewwwwwwwwwwwwww
 
2007-04-30 10:10:39 PM  
tweekster: cryptozoophiliac:

You have never worked in any major governmental or non governmental organization have you? Incompetence always gets promoted, the upper echelons of every organization is filled with morons totally incapable of doing their job.


This is so true. And the competent workers get run out or fired because the morons are afraid of them.

Given it's a bridge in California, it would have been easier to go with "sub-standard contractor work by illegal aliens" or "the CalTrans inspectors screwed up after the last earthquake" angle.
 
2007-04-30 10:11:36 PM  
There was an interesting article in the Washington Post (p.A3) today regarding self-deception. It would fit better in a Bush or evolution thread, but here's a quote:

"Deliberate deception among humans, furthermore, requires effort, it requires you to hold both the truth and untruth in your mind...Self-deception offers a way around this psychological hurdle. If you can make yourself believe the untruth, for example, by marshaling evidence that supports your view and ignoring evidence that contradicts your position, it becomes that much easier to persuade others...it usually happens subtly, without the person even being aware of it."
 
2007-04-30 10:13:33 PM  
iKill

Yeah, completely overlook the part about the differences in structural the engineering between the two buildings.

Oh so now you're going to say the Spanish build better buildings than we do?

It's not important.

It is if you're waving a dishtowel out a 110th floor window.
 
2007-04-30 10:14:18 PM  
www.davesweb.cnchost.com

From this angle you can clearly see that fire doesn't have any effect on steel.

Since the construction methods and stress loads were identical in this building and the WTC, we can clearly see that the the WTC was destroyed by BUSHCOS!!!

I'm so far through the looking glass, I'm in the medicine cabinet!
 
2007-04-30 10:14:36 PM  
http://www.softwood.org/AITC_eVersion/EN/p3.htm
 
2007-04-30 10:15:16 PM  
God DAMMIT, you guys keep bringing up engineering.

This is a 9/11 conspiracy thread on FARK.

Get with the program:

/teh thermites wur earin ur steel! oneone!!
 
2007-04-30 10:15:38 PM  
Oh so now you're going to say the Spanish build better buildings than we do?

It's a different type of building; where it was built and who built it is completely irrelevant.

(pssst, not all skyscrapers are the same)
 
Displayed 50 of 589 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report