Found it! Audio from 9/11. you hear explosions

[Mechagodzilla]

Great.

You just spent this entire thread trying to prove a point you don't believe in.

D'oh.

"I can't be wrong because I have no opinion at all."

thanks for wasting all our time, Claky.

 

[baxter]

and there is no evidence for outrageous claims like this considering the visual evidence on hand.

No evidence........ What the hell are you talking about ?

look at me

 

[clarky003]

You wasted your own time, lol dont blame it on me, you assumed i believed in it, Im merely looking at what NIST and FEMA did and didnt include and its pretty messed up.

and thats not the fire that supposedly burned onward in the core of the building afterwards, thats the intial large amount of fuel being ejected outside in a fireball from one of the aircraft taken as it struck/glanced building 2, 30 seconds later there is nothing but small residual fires to be seen like those in building one on the right, that was hit a while ago.. the visible fires actually diminsh as time progresses even in the area's more exposed to the fresh air. try to tell the difference.

 

[baxter]

Oh well there you go, this clearly isn't enough to start a raging inferno.

This clearly isn't enough to rock this building to its foundations.
Heaven forbid I should waste your time with such a trivial thing as a massive fireball from one of the planes that hit the tower.

Quite clearly this wasn't enough; quite clearly some unfathomable mysterious event took place beyond this.

You know Clarky one day you may be proved right, I doubt it, and one day I'll be able to tell the difference between a raging inferno and a fireball.

Until that day I’ll leave you with it, happy in the knowledge that despite what you may think brought down the towers and despite all logic and reason that has been put to you at the end of the day it really doesn't matter a jot what we think.

 

[DancingSoda]

1.) The fires are alleged to have melted the steel in the frame work. Since when does the fuel in a plane burn hot enough to stell ffs?

Since physics existed. JP-8 burns at 1,500 degrees fahrenheit, and materials inside the tower added to the intensity of it.

Temperatures reached up to 3,500 degrees fahrenheit. Please don't act surprised that steel melted at those temperatures (especially when it had thousands of tons on it).

2.) The Black box was destroyed. So how the hell was one of the Hijackers passports "mysteriously" found perfectly intact at the base of the building?

Actually, the Flight Data Recorders weren't so much destroyed as they were not found. You're looking for something the size of mailbox in debris of an entire building.

In fact, you can listen to Flight 93's FDR: http://www.airdisaster.com/download2/ua93.shtml

3.) There is NO way that people like the supposed terrorists could of hit that building, not after training to fly only small, Biz-Jet type aircraft.

Very. Very. Very. Incorrect.

Most commercial pilots started out flying "biz-jet" aircraft. If you can keep a busines aircraft level in flight, you can pilot an airliner.

You won't be able to land too well, however. But, the terrorists didn't need that.

They also took commercial airliner courses, so some the hijacker pilots DID know how to fly them.

 

[Llama]

Since physics existed. JP-8 burns at 1,500 degrees fahrenheit, and materials inside the tower added to the intensity of it.

Temperatures reached up to 3,500 degrees fahrenheit. Please don't act surprised that steel melted at those temperatures (especially when it had thousands of tons on it).

Materials inside the tower? Explain please. It was made almost entirely of Concrete and steel. Was else could have accelerated the temperatures?
(Pm me if you cant be bothered to type a reply with all the pyhsics)

Actually, the Flight Data Recorders weren't so much destroyed as they were not found. You're looking for something the size of mailbox in debris of an entire building.

That still doesnt asnwer the point that they found a PASSPORT in perfect condition. If temperatures have reached (as you say) over 3500 degress, how the heck did the passport survive?

In fact, you can listen to Flight 93's FDR: http://www.airdisaster.com/download2/ua93.shtml

Yeah, that round goes to you.

Very. Very. Very. Incorrect.

Most commercial pilots started out flying "biz-jet" aircraft. If you can keep a busines aircraft level in flight, you can pilot an airliner.

You won't be able to land too well, however. But, the terrorists didn't need that.

They also took commercial airliner courses, so some the hijacker pilots DID know how to fly them.

Hmm, I didn't know that. From what my dad has told me (He's been inside airliner cockpits, and he has piloted a small business Jet aircraft. What he told me was that learning to pilot was of those was basically as simle as riding a bike, and that the big airliners were far more complex, so thats where I got the idea from.
Still, AKAIKnew they didn't take airliner courses, so yeah, my point could be complete crap.

 

[Sprite]

Some of you lot are too narrow-minded (I'm looking at you Mech!)

Nothing is a simple as option A (terrorists) or option B (conspiracy), sure it's pretty obvious that planes hit the towers... and it's probable that terrorists we're suicide pilots... but why didn't the military take control of the planes? Why was there hardly any plane debris found at the Pentagon? Yes, these may of course be evidence for a conspiracy, or they could just be mistakes or false evidence...

Either way, by simply deciding it was either definately how Bush suggested, or it definately some amazing far-fetched conspiracy is stupid. For instance, terrorists were most likely to have conducted 9/11, but it is extremely unlikely that the hijacker's passport's were found at Ground Zero. Therefore, I am suggesting that the Bush Administration ordered them to be 'found' and planted them, to put a better case towards the guilt of al-Quieda and the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan.

Does that make me a conspiracist?? Of course not. In fact those who don't have any doubts whatsoever about 9/11 are sheep to the system.

 

[baxter]

Sprite,

There is always doubt, in any given situation from simple mundane situations as crossing the road to choosing the right car.

This doubt is whereby the conspirators come in.

Point of fact is that 9/11 was such a massive event and has aroused so much interest that people will listen to anything that is to be said about it, ranging as you rightly point out to the dam right absurd to the quite reasonable scientific analyse of the event.

No matter which way you cut this though if anybody is to offer up an alternative explanation as to what happened, this explanation has to be watertight and not based on wild speculation. It needs to take in all the facts, not just a select few. It has to be so precise, clear and undeniable that it would blow away any official version being put forward. To date and to the best of my knowledge no such explanation has been put forward.

There is not a single person, I know, and I include myself who would not welcome seeing the complete and absolute truth being put forward regarding this event but this will never happen when people simply cloud the entire affair with the ridiculous.

Any theory and I mean any theory that is put forward has to hold up under close scrutiny and not simply fall down when awkward questions are asked.

Simple Google 9/11 now will bring up no end of theories and conspiracies.

I have read some of these theories and despite everything that they put forward, they simply do not hold up, because they can never get away from the central issue of Governmental involvement.

I wouldn’t consider it sheep like to question these theories, no more than it is sheep like to question the official version of events.

 

[Glirk Dient]

Alright...let's analyze the sound.

We have 4 explosions before the initial fall and a few after. Note that they all differ in strength. Controlled explosions tend to all happen at once and have the same sound strength.

Also note that a few happened before...so why explode one almost 20 seconds before the fall and slowly blow more up? Also...why continue to blow more up as the building is falling?

Another thing to note...we didn't see any of the windows in the building blow out. If there were explosions inside the building the glass would have blown out and we would be able to see the explosion since the explosions cause A LOT of air pressure change.

Another thing to note is that the collapse started more so at the top of the building...where the plane hit. This is the only exterior damage we can see and we also know that the building is burning from within at this point. If there were demolitions in there they would have been destroyed by the fire.

So in conclusion...there were no explosives in the building. This theory sucks.

 

[DancingSoda]

Materials inside the tower? Explain please. It was made almost entirely of Concrete and steel. Was else could have accelerated the temperatures?

The WTC offices were much like this:

Fire Central. Just look at how many tables and chairs had to have been in just ONE floor... let alone multiple ones.

That still doesnt asnwer the point that they found a PASSPORT in perfect condition. If temperatures have reached (as you say) over 3500 degress, how the heck did the passport survive?

Well, not all the plane wreckage was inside the building. In fact, IIRC, a piece of one of the engines was found 2 blocks or so away from the towers in the middle of the street.

That said, I'm guessing the passport didn't even enter the building. The passport was likely with the hijacker's belongings (either in the cargo or passenger compartment). It probably just hit the ground with wreckage from the plane, never entering the tower.

This is a cargo container from a Boeing 737:
http://www.alaskaair.com/www2/cargo/images/container_3.gif

They are made to withstand bombs, so they are very strong. It's likely one or more were recovered from the WTC.