PBS' "Nova" looks at 9-11

[Archae]

Of course, this is a science program, so the :tinfoilhat: people here will instantly say "It ain't true! It ain't true!" :crazy:

[Wonk]

1. The way you framed this thread it's nothing but flamebait.

[Archae]

6. Only the "WTC was brought down by explosives" whack jobs...

Will take this as flame bait.

[Wonk]

10. Thanks for implying I'm one of them, but I'm not, and I still say

the only reason you posted this like this was hoping for a flame war.

[Archae]

12. I didn't imply you were one.

I said it in a most general way.

[Junkdrawer]

23. Thermite...

You can see it flowing from thw WCT...

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

29. Yup.

You see it coming out just after the pink elephant crashes into it.

[Junkdrawer]

31. And ye shall know them by their non-arguments and their ad hominems...

which they shall call Science.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

32. Yeah, forget science.

If we want to do the 9-11 victims justice, the thing to do is make up shit about pink elephants and thermite.

[Archae]

37. There was no evidence of thermite...

As you say.

I just posted a PBS.org website that shows EXACTLY why the building collapsed.

Not the "thermite" bullshit.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

40. The absence of thermite...

is evidence of pink elephants.

[Archae]

43. Why not?

"There were missiles on the planes!"
"There were nukes on the planes!"

:sarcasm:

(Yes, I have heard those wild-ass "theories" touted as gospel.)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

46. I like it when they get defensive.

Person 1: "I'm stupid. I'm stupid. I'm stupid. I'm stupid."

Person 2: "You're stupid."

Person 1: "HOW DARE YOU!"

[Junkdrawer]

42. Pink Elephants

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=964034652002408586&q=steven+9%2F11&hl=en

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

45. Yes.

Here's video of the pink elephants attacking the WTC.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=rVl317vqPGc

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mike_c]

3. interesting-- has this already aired...?

?

[neoblues]

9. It's on right now, Eastern time... nt.

[msongs]

11. this may be an old show...at least a year, maybe two..or not.

nova had another show about the buildings and how they were built and probably collapsed.

this may be the same one. it is at least a year old and probably more.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[Kingshakabobo]

33. Just starting now in central time zone.

The guide says its new(2006)

[C_U_L8R]

4. "Wake Me Up When September Ends"

gonna go take Billy Joe's advice

[ThomWV]

5. It Would Appear You Mistake This For A Science-hating Republican Board

[Archae]

7. I've seen almost as much science hatred...

On different subjects here, than I have at FR.

Especially anything that contradicts a cherished belief, no matter how off-the-wall.

[stepnw1f]

I Highly Doubt That

That's garbage.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

41. Oh, I've seen a lot f anti-science bullshit.

But it's mostly from a few loons.

Not much like freerep. though.

[stepnw1f]

47. No Where Near as Much as Freeperland

There are some, but I would bet ya any that they are mainly trolls. Bad comparison is all I'm saying.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

48. Sure.

Republicans are anti-science as a matter of policy.

[Junkdrawer]

51. For the record...

I've been posting on this board since May 2002. Until early this year, I supported a "Bush knew but let it happen" theory. On a dare, I'll go to the archives and point out where I said that and discounted any "MIHOP" (Made It Happen On Purpose) type scenario.

Much to my chagrin, I now feel the evidence points to MIHOP. I wish it didn't because I know damn well how hard it will be to convince people that that's what happened.

[Realityhack]

52. Just for fun...

I would be interested to know what evidence you beleive points to a MIHOP scenario and why (and what scenario or set of senarios do you think are posible).

[Junkdrawer]

53. See post #42. n/t

[Realityhack]

57. Yes I saw the video in 42...

and I am aware of some of the exercises.

What I want to know is what scenario or set of scenarios YOU think are posible. And why.

[Junkdrawer]

59. Meaning who did it, how they did it and why they did it?

I have some ideas, but it's too much to post on a doomed thread like this.

'Crossing the Rubicon' by Mike Ruppert comes close, but I think he's too aggressive on his Peak Oil timing. e.g. Saudi Arabia has more oil than Mike thinks.

[Realityhack]

79. Thats unfortunate...

I realy was interested.

[Junkdrawer]

55. Oh, and the many military exercises on 9/11 also suggest MIHOP n/t

[neoblues]

8. Fortunately, Science allows for a variety of theories...

however, to do Science properly, a proper investigation, complete with adequate collection and analysis of evidence... It was just a little too convenient that Scientists and Engineers weren't allowed access and key evidence was promptly destroyed.

[Bluebear]

13. If you don't agree with the official version of 9/11 you're anti-science

is THAT what you're saying?

[Archae]

15. I'm saying...

That there is *NO* credible evidence that "planted explosives" brought down the WTC, a truck bomb hit the Pentagon, etc.

As to Bush and his goons knowing this was going to happen, *THAT* is still up in the air.
LIHOP.

[Bluebear]

16. I still marvel that a 767 can hit the Pentagon & there is no photo of it.

But I also am pro-science. :crazy:

[Archae]

17. So the survelliance photos...

And hundreds of witnesses are all faking it?

[Bluebear]

18. I've not seen a surveillance photo with the plane intact

All I have seen is photos of the Pentagon exploding, you can't really tell what is striking it. Can you provide a link, I would LOVE to finally see that!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. LOL.

That's right. Terrorists actually flew a non-intact plane into the Pentagon. It's lies! Oh, it's all lies!

[Bluebear]

20. Eh, you're just anti-science.

Frankly I don't even get the initial framing of this thread :)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. Am not.

I did my Alternative PhD thesis on the aerodynamics of non-intact jet liners.

[Bluebear]

24. Ooh I found one!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

25. That's what we in the business call...

"mostly intact."

[Bluebear]

26. Truthfully can't believe they ever landed THAT plane!

http://www.aloha.net/~icarus/

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

28. I remember when that happened.

There was a TV movie too.

[seabeyond]

27. they dont have one showing plane. they confiscated the three businesses

that had film of the plane going in. we havent seen any footage. sure would be a quick way to shut everyone up to let us see that film of the airliner going into the building, dontcha think. and there were a lot of contradiction on if it was a airliner, or other going into the pentagon.

[Bluebear]

30. I never heard from these "hundreds of witnesses" either.

Really. I would love to read the transcripts. "Yes there I was coming out of Pentagon City mall and I saw a jumbo jet getting lower and lower. I thought it was going to land at National, but no! There it came to the Pentagon. I could clearly see the airlines markings, then the pilot deftly lowered the nose into the Pentagon wall and BOOM!"

[kwassa]

78. why do I bother? oh well

An work acquaintance of my wife was driving through the Pentagon parking lot when the plane came in over her head and hit the building. She completely freaked, of course.

[truebrit71]

72. What photos and which witnesses?

....hello?


....hello?

[rinsd]

66. LOL...pro science with specious reasoning?

There was no photo so there must have been no plane.

[dflprincess]

14. Hopefully they do a better job with 9/11 than they did with JFK's murder

which never questioned a word in the Warren Commission Report (though I can't recall if they bothered to take on the magic bullet).

[mikelewis]

61. In 1979, they finally held a hearing and determined there was a conspiracy

From the "Report of the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives; 1979"...

B. Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.
C. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy.
http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/summary.html

Turns out, the "wing-nuts" were right, there was a second gunman on the grassy knoll. There's a lot more to the report and it also covers the MLK assasination which was also ruled a conspiracy. Go figure.

[dflprincess]

64. And then Congress decided not to continue funding for the Committee

how very odd. :sarcasm:

[Junkdrawer]

21. So...is 9/11 discussion now allowed in GD?

:shrug:

[mikelewis]

36. Deriding people who believe 9/11 was a conspiracy is always...

acceptable... That, at least, is something the Left and the Right always agree on.

[Junkdrawer]

39. Yep. I think that was what got Malloy. The third rail of US politics...

Touch it and you're out of here...

[Bluebear]

54. Kumbayah.

It's a shame you can't even discuss it.

[mikelewis]

34. The 9/11 truth movement is not against science...

The goal of the movement is to get an impartial investigation into the events of 9/11. There are a great many inconsistencies in the official story and resounding questions that cannot be answered by your overwhelming faith in the U.S. media to tell you the truth (at least concerning 9/11, they lie about everything else, of course). The goal of the Truth Movement is not to offer "conspiracy theories" but to highlight the glaring inconsistencies and outright lies put for by the Bush administration. During the course of this campaign, alternate theories are being put forth but they are just theories. Until a real investigation into the events of that day is conducted by an impartial panel, we will never know for sure what happened (unless of course you find it easier to bow to the Fox News and Rush Limbaugh versions of reality). I don't understand why people feel this is an unreasonable request and I definitely don't understand why people who believe Bush would: a) steal 2 election b) lie us into a war where more U.S. servicemen and women have died than in the 9/11 attacks (and that's not even counting the innocent Iraqi deaths) c) Impose a campaign to eviscerate our Constitution and spy on innocent Americans d) leave thousands of poor black Americans to drown in Lake New Orleans... I don't understand how people who believe all of this also believe Bush isn't capable of hiding the truth about 9/11. Mock us all you want but 36% of Americans are now asking questions, when that number reaches 51%, what will you say then? What about when that number reaches 66% or even 75%? What then? Will you still mock us? All we want is an impartial investigation; for that, we deserve your scorn?

[Bad Penny]

58. The more the evidence points toward

an ugly truth, the more people, regardless of their politics, are too frightened by the ramifications to confront it.

[Archae]

35. Try this.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/sunder.html

Or is this guy "paid off by the Bushies" too?

Oh but hey!
"The Mossad warned all Jews not to go into the WTC!"
"The videos of the airliners hitting the WTC are fakes!"
"There was a flying saucer seen at the WTC!"

Something brought up at the beginning of the show, was the fact that Tim McVeigh's truck bomb caused a big hole, next to the Oklahoma City building.
It also blew out several supports, and the building fell down.

And steel in high-temperature fires DOES get soft and weaken.

[frylock]

67. some core columns at wtc were exposed briefly to temps of 600°..

most of the steel was exposed to temps of 250°. Hardly enough to melt steel.

1) No WTC-7 steel was recovered or analyzed.

2) No unprocessed, intact floor trusses were recovered or analyzed.

3) No testing for explosives (or sulfidation or other residue of any kind) was performed.

4) Only 12 total core columns were recovered from WTC-1 & WTC-2 combined.

5) Of the recovered core pieces, none showed exposure to temperatures in excess of 250 C.

6) Of 170 examined areas on the perimeter column panels, only three showed exposure to temperatures in excess of 250 C and for one of these three forensic evidence indicated that the high temperature exposure occurred AFTER the collapse.

7) No recovered steel showed any evidence of exposure to temperatures above 600 C for any significant time

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=125&topic_id=45315

But you can go ahead and talk about flying saucers or sasquatch or whatever it takes to maintain your shattered view of reality.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

38. self deleted

wrong spot.

[leftofthedial]

44. depends on what they have to say

Could be that the tin foil hatters who believe the official conspiracy theory/cover story will be screaming.

[Kingshakabobo]

49. Doesn't look like it is going that way. nt

[DemonFighterLives]

50. Is junk Science OK

Since you are a true believer.
Steel melted- :rofl:
This thread- :silly:

[Archae]

56. NOT melted!

Softened, to the point it couldn't support a damn thing.

Get it right.

[LTR]

60. Well, where are the passenger jets with the missles?

And the explosives rigged inside the building?

Or the sharks with the laser beams?

Or the giant mutated sea bass?

Sorry. Having too much fun.

:tinfoilhat:

[mikelewis]

62. Very clever, your momma must be proud of that brain of yours...

However, you obviously do not understand where the burden of evidence lies. We don't have to prove any of our theories. You must prove yours. You are the prosecution here. It is your story that seems too incredible to believe; yet you wish to prosecute a war on the world, justifying the deaths of thousands, all based on the word of a known liar and his propaganda machine.

If you'll recall, the Taliban offered to give up Osama bin Laden if the U.S. would provide the proof that he was responsible for the attacks. Bush's answer was bombs, not proof. Colin Powell said that he would release a detailed report proving that Bin Laden executed the attacks. Still to this day... crickets. The 9/11 commission, which was opposed tooth and nail by Bush and Cheney, never covered WTC7, never covered the wargames on 9/11, never addressed the multiple eyewitnesses to explosions going off in the building; this commission came out just recently and stated that they were close to referring the Pentagon to the justice department for lying... Hmmm...

So funny guy, prove it was 19 arabs with razor blades and kerosene that destroyed 4 buildings with 3 planes. Prove flight 77 hit the pentagon. Prove that there was no warning for the attacks. Prove the attacks were used to advance the aims of the Islamic community. Prove they attacked us for our freedoms. I'm sure you have all the answers and while you're at it, please answer the questions the 9/11 victims families have been asking for years such as...

Why did Bush just sit there in that class room while America was under attack? Why was Cheney wisked to safety while Bush was left exposed? Why weren't the wargames immediately cancelled and a full spectrum lock down on all air trafic immediately ordered when the first plane struck the building? Where was our air force? What became of the numerous warnings from multiple countries concerning an imminent attack on New York? Why wasn't the American people informed that "Bin Laden was determined to attack the United States"?

Here is a list of questions the victims have about 9/11. Maybe you can send them all emails and tell them how ignorant they are. That would be a hoot. http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html

Oh, right, I forgot, they're still too busy looking for "sharks with laser beams" to bother with funny guys like you.

[Bluebear]

63. Bravo. nt

[rinsd]

65. Big diff between new investigation and the crap you foilers peddle.

Anytime someone says no plane at the pentagon and controlled demo, I know to no longer listen.

[rman]

68. You call mikelewis a crap peddling foiler even though he said none

of the things you know not to listen to?

What's that about?

[QuettaKid]

73. WHY ISIN'T THIS THREAD IN THE DUNGEON ? ! ? ? ! nt.

.

[rman]

74. That may be the purpose.

[IChing]

75. Agreed, the dungeon can set you free to the truth

It sure open my eyes.

[rinsd]

77. Facts are your friend

"Prove flight 77 hit the pentagon." - from Mike's post.

And since this is a thread dealing with Capt Thermite, I figured the controlled demo wasn;t that big a stretch to throw in

Though my accusation shouldn't have been leveled at Mike personally.

Its more a collective guffaw and all controlled demo/no plane foilers.

[rman]

80. Asking for evidence is not the same as saying there was no plane

There are videos of it that should clearly show the plane. The videos are not released to the public.

Same with photos the NYPD is claimed to have, photos that show severe damage to the south face of WTC7.

[Junkdrawer]

69. *fingers in ears* La La La...I can't hear you.....

I guess that's what you call science....

[rman]

76. that's more than excellent

i'm going to use that

[longship]

70. Tick, tick, tick.

:popcorn:

[longship]

71. Tick, tick, tick...

:popcorn: