|
| Thread: How to dismantle an Atombomb with your teeth! |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted November 17, 2004 07:42 AM |
|
Edited By: Consis on 17 Nov 2004
|
Old News
I've seen this several times already. It's nothing new in the direction of motivated conspiracy theorists.
I'm with bort on this one. I remember that day clear as a bell and I saw no such thing as every channel, excluding the cartoon network, showed the footage over and over.
And about the pentagon, bort's 100% correct. That building is exactly as he says. But don't take my word for it, try researching the old military forts in the war of 1812. As I recall, the national anthem was written during one of the English sieges.
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
Vadskye91
Promising
Supreme Hero
Back again
|
posted November 17, 2004 01:58 PM |
|
|
Okay, I don't believe that conspiracy theory anymore... But can anyone say why there isn't a crater like in the Flight 93 crash? After all the ground isn't fortified or whatever.
____________
Knowledge is power...
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted November 17, 2004 06:23 PM |
|
Edited By: Consis on 17 Nov 2004
|
Vadskye91,
That's easy to answer. I've been following this particular event of 9/11. I also have the book entitled, Let's Roll written by Beamer/Abraham.
First of all, try researching the effects of explosive devices. A simple google search of 'blast patterns' will reveal a number of reasonable websites.
Secondly, try researching the makeup of a 747 commercial airplane. I believe you'll find it is primarily comprised of a lightweight skeletal system of high-end tensile strength metal alloy. What that means is that the proverbial bones of the airplane are made of a mixture of metals put together in the right proportions so as to become stronger but not heavier. Through your research, you may also find that the general schematics of an airplane is very similar to that of a bird. As we all know, birds have hollow bones that help them weigh less which makes it easier for them to fly.
Third, hypothesize and research the likelihood of a hollow/lightweight object striking the earth at terminal velocity. Keep in mind also that the object carries airplane fuel(which will create a fire that burns many times hotter and faster than any normal fire). Keep in mind that because of the design of the airplane, oxygen will be in abundant supply. Remember basic fire knowledge, fire needs three things to exist: Oxygen, fuel, and heat.
Now compare your prior research of the airplane crash to your research of a bomb. You should see a very clear and distinct difference. A bomb(depending on it's design) will have a point of explosion and a specific amount of "yield" travelling out from the epicenter(point of detonation). So....what you will (very generally) see is a great amount of force moving outward in all directions with a bomb. This is substancially different from an airplane with a lot of fuel and other combustable material. The airplane will literally obliterate itself in a relatively small area of effect.
Bombs are generally designed to explode. That's why I very much disagree with calling the airplanes that were used on 9/11 "bombs". They aren't. I donot think a bomb could cause the towers to fall. The airplane fuel burned so hot that it melted the steel girters framing the buildings. A bomb depends entirely on its design but generally eminates a great amount of force outward with a finite area of effect. A plane brought down in the manner 97 was, creates the ideal environment for near complete disentigration. The only parts of the plane that would survive the intense heat from the crash would be those that where hurled far enough away and those that were buried deep enough in the soil. Speaking of the soil, it should be noted that small patches of glass were found at the crash site. The fire was so hot, it melted the rock into glass, thus no human remains were found.
As for the 'black box', I haven't the slightest idea how it survived. That technology is unknown to me.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
Shadowcaster
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Shaded Scribe
|
|
posted November 17, 2004 06:33 PM |
|
|
There's also angle of impact to take into consideration.
____________
>_>
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted November 17, 2004 06:35 PM |
|
|
Yeah. It would probably have a somewhat flat, downward course...
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Vadskye91
Promising
Supreme Hero
Back again
|
|
posted November 17, 2004 06:40 PM |
|
|
Okay then!
*feels like a foobum for believing it in the first place* 
____________
Knowledge is power...
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
|
posted November 17, 2004 07:55 PM |
bonus applied. |
Edited By: Consis on 2 Dec 2004
|
I Don't Think I Explained Very Well
Ok Let me try and make as simple an analogy as possible.
Take two balloons. Blow them both up with hydrogen gas. Now place one balloon on the ground. Dig a hole and place the other in the hole. Cover the hole up with dirt so that the balloon is mostly covered with earth. Leave a small portion of this balloon exposed.
You should have two balloons, one sitting on the ground and the other buried.
Now take a match and light the balloon resting on the ground. You should see a nice colorful ball of fire appear where the balloon was as it explodes and quickly burns all of the hydrogen gas away. Down beneath the balloon you should see tiny signs of charring. You might also see some of the dirt was pushed away from where the balloon caught fire. When the balloon ignited, the gas inside it should have burned faster than it could escape through the hole caused by the match. The opposing force of the tensile strength of the container(balloon) material(rubber) causes an equal amount of exploding force moving outwards originating from inside the balloon. We know that rubber is very flexible and easily stretched, etc. It does not have the ability to hold the quickly expanding gases inside the balloon. So really, it all disappears in a fraction of a second. A ball of fire, minimal effects around the flashpoint.
Now take a match to the buried balloon. Let's pretend this balloon is a simulated bomb or missile that penetrated the ground. Once it has penetrated the earth, dirt should fall in over it encapsulating/surrounding it. The weight of the dirt + the container tensile strength(rubber balloon) are now combining to keep any and all expanding materials from escaping. The small hole that was created by the match will not be enough to contain the rapidly expanding gases which are now burning at an accelerated rate underneath the soil and rubber housing. You should see the ground where you buried the balloon be forced upward and outward away from the point of ignition(detonation). When gas(or any other combustable material) expands it moves away from the flashpoint in all directions. The earth beneath it is much more solid and immovable while above lies less resistance and more oxygen. The burning material also becomes lighter weight and therefore will rise to a higher altitude. All these factors work together to force the buried balloon up and out of the hole. First you should see a rising of dirt and burning material. Then you should see gravity pulling the expelled material back towards the earth. Some of the material will fall back into the hole and some will fall in a dispersal pattern around the hole depending on how strong the wind is. You should be left with a pot-hole half-full of loose debris and a blast radius(yield pattern) of debris circling the hole where the balloon exploded.
So to compare, a missile/bomb would normally penetrate the earth at some point and then explode. The 747 airplane would simply wipe itself out on impact. The force of missile/bomb blast would start underground, causing a hole. The force of the airplane hitting the ground would be transferred to the surrounding area in a sort of upside-down mushroom cloud dispersal pattern. And yes, the angle of trajectory does matter for both instances but I chose to leave that and many other extraneous factors out. I assumed both examples used a direct approach toward the ground from a high altitude.
It is important to remember that a missile/bomb is created to detonate/explode from a very small tightly enclosed space. That's the science of a bomb/missile. If you design such weapons, you want the right bomb for the right target. Too much opposing force can greatly restrain the weapon's yield while too little resistance will cause the yield to be less effective. It all depends on what you want to do. Do you want to hit an underground bunker or take out several city buildings encompassing 3 or 4 blocks? Each target requires a different bomb design with different yield patterns and explosive materials.
F.Y.I........a nuclear bomb has its greatest yield(most effective damage) when detonated 100ft off the ground. That height will allow it to destroy the most buildings, kill the most people, etc...
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
|
Leo_Lion
Honorable
Supreme Hero
The 5th Element & 6th Sense!
|
|
posted November 18, 2004 01:10 AM |
|
|
I'm not so sure about this...
A few points of interest have been brought to my attention when I discussed this issue with some of my coworkers. These are arguments for both sides of this debate and are not necessarily my own...
#1- Why would the Government choose to attack the Pentagon to gain Public support? Easy...the Pentagon is a Military facility, whereas the WTC was a privately owned set of buildings.
If the Al-Quaida terrorists only attacked the WTC, then the Government would have been justified to hunt them down and bring them to justice, while having the People's support to do so.
By claiming that there was also a terrorist attack on the Pentagon, then the Government would have been politically justified in starting a war! So, they chose the Taliban, which were in control of Pakistan, and said: "Hey! We are coming after these terrorists for destroying the WTC and attacking the Pentagon and we are also coming after you because your governement is harboring these psychos! And don't think for a minute that other Nations are going to come to your defense because the terrorists made this into a war when they attacked a Military Installation!"
#2-a) If the attack on the Pentagon was initiated by the Government, then why didn't Al-Quaida deny being responsible? If I remember correctly, in Osama Bin Laden's video testimonies, he claims the attack was part of his "Master-Plan" and there was a story going around that a 4th plane that crashed in a field, was headed for the Pentagon.
#2-b) So, why didn't Al-Quaida deny responsibility of the attack on the Pentagon? I'll tell you why...because the whole 9/11 "Master-Plan" was an arrangement between the Bush Administration & the C.I.A.'s "Infiltrator" Osama Bin Laden! As is proved in Micheal Moore's film Farenheit 9/11, Osama Bin Laden's family was flown around America, after all air traffic was supposed to be grounded. It's interesting to note that the Bush Administration, which authorized the flights, already knew that Osama Bin Laden was the "Mastermind" behind the attacks, even before Al-Quaida claimed responsibility.
#3- What happened to Flight #77? No brainer...It never existed! If the Bush camp can find a way to get the names of dead people on the the Voter's Registry for the Election, I'm pretty sure that they can find a bunch of names to fill a fake Passenger Manifest.
I hope these arguments rekindle the debate, because all of the points we bring up here help me get ideas on how to RULE THE WORLD!  LOL!
____________
*The end to no beginning...
*Take care, Leo
|
|
tyler
Known Hero
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 12:15 PM |
|
|
Makes perfect sense to me Leo !
A good consipracy theory must have a good music theme 
I dig !
____________
Sir, we are surrounded! Excellent, now we can attack in any direction!
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 12:20 PM |
|
|
Quote:
#1- Why would the Government choose to attack the Pentagon to gain Public support? Easy...the Pentagon is a Military facility, whereas the WTC was a privately owned set of buildings.
If the Al-Quaida terrorists only attacked the WTC, then the Government would have been justified to hunt them down and bring them to justice, while having the People's support to do so.
By claiming that there was also a terrorist attack on the Pentagon, then the Government would have been politically justified in starting a war! So, they chose the Taliban, which were in control of Pakistan, and said: "Hey! We are coming after these terrorists for destroying the WTC and attacking the Pentagon and we are also coming after you because your governement is harboring these psychos! And don't think for a minute that other Nations are going to come to your defense because the terrorists made this into a war when they attacked a Military Installation!"
Actually, I think they could have declared war on Afghanistan with the blessing of other nations without having to blow up their own Defence Departement... 
But you made some good points, I think...
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 12:46 PM |
|
|
It was a good movie, but I don't trust it in the slightest.
It seems incredibly unofficial, someone could have photoshopped the whole thing.
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
Vadskye91
Promising
Supreme Hero
Back again
|
|
posted November 19, 2004 03:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
It was a good movie, but I don't trust it in the slightest.
It seems incredibly unofficial, someone could have photoshopped the whole thing.
No duh? Conspiracy theories are generally not supported by the government...
____________
Knowledge is power...
|
|
zonekill
Adventuring Hero
Wiedzmin
|
|
posted November 20, 2004 12:03 PM |
|
|
For all those love who love conspirady theories, there's a new movie at cinemas near you: The Manchurian Candidate, starring Denzel DoubleUashington and Meryl Streep. A god one. Kinda "Public enemy" (with Will Smith).
____________
The Preacher
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted November 20, 2004 08:26 PM |
|
|
So how long does it take conspirators to come up with a conspiracy plan anyway?
(times are approximate)
8:45 First plane hits WTC.
8:55 Bush is informed of attack. (Assume he is one of the first high level officials to hear about it.)
9:00 Other high level officials hear about it.
9:10 High level official gets on phone with other high level officials.
"Hey, did you hear about the WTC attack?"
"Yea, I heard"
"You want to have a conspiracy?"
"Sure. What do you want to do?"
"I don't know, but we have to come up with something quickly."
9:15 conversation continues
"I know, lets shoot a missile at the Pentagon"
"Great idea, but if we're going to have a conspiracy, we have to have a reason for doing it"
"Let's worry about the reason later, we have to hurry so it looks related to the WTC attack"
"OK, let's get going on it. You know anyone who has a missile handy?"
"Well, General Ledger is into doing conspiracies. Let's get him in on it."
9:30 Call to General Ledger
"Hey General, me and some buddies are doing a conspiracy. Do you want in on it, it'll be fun."
"Sure, what are we doing?"
"We're going to shoot a missile at the Pentagon."
"Cool, I might be able to help you on that part."
9:35 General Ledger calls Colonel Popcorn
"Hey Popcorn, you're going to shoot a missile at the Pentagon"
"I am? Why would I do that?"
"First, because it's a conspiracy and you are going to be part of it. Second, because I say so and I outrank you."
"Oh. OK."
"You have to do it ASAP so it looks related to the WTC attack."
"OK"
9:40 Colonel Popcorn calls Sergeant Shriver
"Shriver, shoot a missile at the Pentagon. NOW!
"Sir yes Sir"
9:42 Sergeant Shriver shoots missile at Pentagon
9:45 Missile hits Pentagon.
9:50 High level officials celebrate successful conspiracy.
"So now we need to come up with a reason for the conspiracy."
"Don't worry about it, the conspiracy theorists will come up with something. It'll be all over the Internet in no time."
There you have it. A conspiracy in less than an hour. A new world record.
____________
|
|
ratmonky
Famous Hero
Abu Hur Ibn Rashka
|
|
posted November 20, 2004 08:52 PM |
|
|
|
lmfao binabik, that was hillarious, but i'd expect such a thing from Bush (i just watched Fahrenheit 9/11 today and i'm still under the impression)
|
|
Vadskye91
Promising
Supreme Hero
Back again
|
|
posted November 21, 2004 12:11 AM |
|
|
1t Doe5 WiErD1Y THInGs t0 yOur br4iN huH?
____________
Knowledge is power...
|
|
Leo_Lion
Honorable
Supreme Hero
The 5th Element & 6th Sense!
|
posted November 21, 2004 09:29 PM |
|
|
Binabik and everyone else
That was good stuff! But, you forgot to mention that when the President was notified of the attack, he had spent the night on a drinking binge, playing HoMM3, and was found sleeping in Lincoln's bedroom closet, spooning with his dogs!
C'mon man, get your "facts" straight! LOL
P.S. I just came to realise that we can't blame everything on poor George W. Bush. After all, Presidents change office every 4 or 8 years. To organize long-running plots & conspiracies, a more permanent administration would be necessary to effectively achieve long-term goals. I can thank my dad for explaining this one to me, but most things that the United States Government has "secretly arranged" since the 2nd World War, has been done through the CIA or the NSA.
That's why these organisations killed the Kennedy brothers, they wanted to change America's "world domination" policy.
____________
*The end to no beginning...
*Take care, Leo
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted December 01, 2004 03:53 AM |
|
|
Off topic, but...
Quote:
has been done through the CIA or the NSA.
(for those unfamiliar with NSA, they are even more secretive than the CIA.)
I used to work with an engineer whose previous job was with the NSA. He was a camera expert...gee I wonder how that fits in with an intellegence agency?
When I worked with him, his camera experience at the NSA was used in the design of a product some of us might own. It's the camera, cell phone, modem combo. This was approx 1996.
He bought off the shelf phone, camera and modems. Opened them up, connected a bunch of wires between them and added some additional circuitry and programming. The biggest obstacle was to send voice, switch to digital transmission, then back to voice without reconnecting. The modem manufacturer said it couldn't be done. But he ignored them and did it anyway.
I don't know what happened to that project after I left. But it's quite possible that NSA technology is in those picture phones.
____________
|
|
Leo_Lion
Honorable
Supreme Hero
The 5th Element & 6th Sense!
|
posted December 02, 2004 06:44 AM |
|
|
That's a great segway to my next point...
Cell phones with built-in cameras & modems in 1996...would almost have sounded like sci-fi 8 years ago. But when you consider that this "Global Domination" conspiracy has been in the works for around 50 years, it shouldn't surprise many of us. Neither should the fact that the entire 9/11 attacks were planned by either CIA or NSA officials. Why would they do that???
Well, besides the information provided in my previous Post, Binabik indirectly brought up another good one. Some of you might already be aware of this, but after the 9/11 attacks, Congress passed a Bill that ultimately gives Federal Institutions (FBA, CIA, NSA, & Military) access to everyone's privacy without the need for Warrants or consent. This was also brought up in Michael Moore's film "Farenheit 9/11".
The 9/11 attacks were just the "coincidence" the Government needed to justify proposing and then passing a Bill with many Amendements, which are flagrent infrigements upon an individual's rights & civil liberties, to the Bill of Rights. Also, the technology that Binabik's friend was creating in 1996 is probably obsolete by now, so just imagine what they had on the shelf, just waiting for the Government's approval to put into operation. (Anyone see Will Smith & Gene Hackman in Enemy of the State?! )
I'm still not too sure how this little bit of information fits into the whole puzzle yet, but wasn't there a big shake-up in the CIA involving the Director's Office & upper Management a few months ago?!
____________
*The end to no beginning...
*Take care, Leo
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
|
posted January 12, 2005 08:06 PM |
|
Edited By: Consis on 12 Jan 2005
|
Arrggghhh.....
I still feel as though I haven't explained myself very well. It concerns my Qp post in this thread.
Wolfman had asked how the Pennsylvania flight left almost no debris. His question was to help answer whether the plane had been shot down or simply crashed.
To this very day I am in complete question of this very same dilemma, but I must carefully weigh the evidence. This flight had been almost completely obliterated, meaning there wasn't hardly anything left to perform research on.
But if the plane was shot down, and this is the most key evidence, the fuselage, wings, tail assembly, engine, and other internal parts would be instantly subjected to an exploding force(force physically pushing all parts from the epicenter outward in all directions) at any altitude above at least 500ft. Any explosive force being applied to the airplane would have a dispersing effect on the plane and its components. The plane components would then be scattered to the winds, in affect, being carried for miles away from the direct global position of where the remainder of the plane crashed.(much like the space shuttle Columbia)
But we didn't see such evidence. Instead we saw a very clear relatively small diameter of crash site. The nearby treetops were burned/singed; all vegetation/plantlife were dissintegrated; the earthen soil was forcefully pushed outward creating a relative crater.
Had the plane been hit with a missile/rocket it would have lost a great deal of its mass and leaked/ignited/burned fuel in the instant it was struck. Had the plane lost much more of its mass then we wouldn't have seen much of a crater at all with very little earthen soil being moved about. The tops of trees at the crash site were singed and blackened several hundreds of feet away meaning that there was a significant amount of fuel burning. And what's more about this far-reaching fire is that you could easily postulate the intensity of the heat by the distance of its effects. Jet fuel burns much faster and hotter than any normal fire.
To simplify it all (as I wished I had done earlier for people reading this) the crash site contained debris and 'rock-solid' evidence that the plane was in fact not shot down. It was a very sobering scene of what occurs when jet fuel burns while being supplied with a near slightly strong breeze of wind and oxygen. Patches of silicon were produced, metal was melted to a liquid state, and flesh/bones were instantly turned to ashes.
Perhaps this will help calm/ease my nerves. I wanted to make sure I got this right. I want to honor the sacrifice made by the victims of this noble and infamous flight. They have gone now.......into the hearts and minds of many millions of americans.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I
|
| |
|
|
