You are Here: Home

# 9/11 Conspiracy theory. What do you think? Watch

Announcements
• View Poll Results: What happened on 9/11?
An inside job by the US government. The US carried out the attacks intentionally for alterior motives.
42.02%

1. (Original post by x-friends)
There is evidence for both it being an inside job and it being caused by terrorists, so I'm open about it.

But steel has never been melted by fire either before or after it happened on the day.

Also there's a lot of evidence to suggest controlled explosives within the building played a huge part in the buildings collapse.
Im sure I have explained this to you before but what the hell.

The fire in the towers was measured at being around 1200 degress. This is the temp when steel loses around 50 to 80% of its strength.

And no there is no evidence to support the idea of controlled demolition. Anyone that thinks this does not understand anything about how a controlled demolition is carried out or the type's of explosives and quantity that would be needed.
2. (Original post by ijaz)
yes the maths doenst hold up but the laws of physics dont lie either

research 9/11 enginers truth
fire doesnt get hot enough to melt steel
and if the planes hit the towers sideward it is impossible that the towers fell straight down.
and why did building 7 in which no planes hit go straight down controlled explosion 100%
i asked my teacher and he said exactly the same thing
No your right they don't lie. Just like its a fact steel loses more than half its load bearing strength at around 1200 degrees. The fire in the tower was at least 1500 degrees
3. explain building 7
and how did someone measure the temperature inside the towers at the time
4. (Original post by Aj12)
Im sure I have explained this to you before but what the hell.

The fire in the towers was measured at being around 1200 degress. This is the temp when steel loses around 50 to 80% of its strength.

And no there is no evidence to support the idea of controlled demolition. Anyone that thinks this does not understand anything about how a controlled demolition is carried out or the type's of explosives and quantity that would be needed.
im sure upto 2000 of the leading architects in the world dont lie.
explain building 7
and by the way the government will debunk or make anyone look bad who says anything against them, anyone who question the official story is a nut.

Muhhamed ali refused to fight in th vietnam war the governtment ordere the boxing board of control to take his license and this was when he was in his prime.

people and the mainstream media, i.e bbc,sky news ,cnn always say the people are bad like they did in the student fees protests.
no-one higlights flaws in the government now do they
5. (Original post by S129439)
To be fair the steel isn't an issue. It didn't need to melt. The steel bars were load bearing so only needed to lose a bit of strength to give way. Steel loses up to 50% of it's strength at 1100°F. Jet fuel can and did burn at 1500°F during the burning of the WTC.
That's fine, but on 9/11 it was reported that the steel did melt.
6. (Original post by Aj12)
Im sure I have explained this to you before but what the hell.

The fire in the towers was measured at being around 1200 degress. This is the temp when steel loses around 50 to 80% of its strength.

And no there is no evidence to support the idea of controlled demolition. Anyone that thinks this does not understand anything about how a controlled demolition is carried out or the type's of explosives and quantity that would be needed.
I know perfectly well how they are carried out. There were also numerous reconstructions on a program on the National Geography channel which did not fit what happened to the WTC on 9/11.

For the buildings to fall the way they did needed controlled explosives within the buildings.

And I'm guessing you got your information from the final report of the investigation conducted by the government.
7. (Original post by x-friends)
I know perfectly well how they are carried out. There were also numerous reconstructions on a program on the National Geography channel which did not fit what happened to the WTC on 9/11.

For the buildings to fall the way they did needed controlled explosives within the buildings.

And I'm guessing you got your information from the final report of the investigation conducted by the government.
nice to see someone who actually asks questions and doesnt blindly beleive what the government says
8. (Original post by x-friends)
I know perfectly well how they are carried out. There were also numerous reconstructions on a program on the National Geography channel which did not fit what happened to the WTC on 9/11.

For the buildings to fall the way they did needed controlled explosives within the buildings.

And I'm guessing you got your information from the final report of the investigation conducted by the government.
No I got my information from common sense and knowledge of what it takes to demolish a building.

You would pretty much need to hollow the inside of the building and place explosive charges throughout for it to bring down the towers. This could not be kept secret
9. (Original post by ijaz)
nice to see someone who actually asks questions and doesnt blindly beleive what the government says
Shame much of what she is saying has no scientific base whatsoever. Just because you question the government does not make what you say automatically true.
10. (Original post by Aj12)
Shame much of what she is saying has no scientific base whatsoever. Just because you question the government does not make what you say automatically true.
and just because what you say is true doesnt mean it is.
weve got leading archticets who are experts in controlled demolitions saying it was.
how do you explain building 7?
why doesnt the governement investegate it properly

inside job 100%
11. (Original post by ijaz)
and just because what you say is true doesnt mean it is.
weve got leading archticets who are experts in controlled demolitions saying it was.
how do you explain building 7?
why doesnt the governement investegate it properly

inside job 100%
No not really. Plenty of architects and experts in controlled demolition accept that it was not an inside job.

Some historians believe the holocaust never happened would you believe them?
12. (Original post by Aj12)
No not really. Plenty of architects and experts in controlled demolition accept that it was not an inside job.

Some historians believe the holocaust never happened would you believe them?
where did the holocaust come in
i suppose those are the ones you see on mainstream bbc and sky and cnn who by the way are a medium by which the government pushes there beleifs upon us.

like the global warming hoax which if anyone is a true sceintist willknow it isnt true but the government fearmonger and pushes legislation.

also you havent answered my question on building 7 in which a plane didnt collapse but this fell exactly the same way so no kerosene involved and there were only 2 small fires.

you are definately in denial

and they didnt even mention this in the 9/11 report
13. Just watch the debunking videos
14. (Original post by ijaz)
where did the holocaust come in
i suppose those are the ones you see on mainstream bbc and sky and cnn who by the way are a medium by which the government pushes there beleifs upon us.

like the global warming hoax which if anyone is a true sceintist willknow it isnt true but the government fearmonger and pushes legislation.

also you havent answered my question on building 7 in which a plane didnt collapse but this fell exactly the same way so no kerosene involved and there were only 2 small fires.

you are definately in denial

and they didnt even mention this in the 9/11 report
Meh far as I knew a load of crap from the other buildings hit it causing a collapse, which sounds like total BS and properly is.

However I do not accept that the main two towers were brought down by a controlled demolition. It makes no sense at all and the entire idea is completly impraticaly and almost impossible.
15. (Original post by S129439)
Thought I would make a thread on this.

Now firstly, I don't necessarily believe it was an inside job. So I don't consider myself a 'conspiracy theorist'. The poll is just to see what others think.

I find some of the inconsistencies and contrary evidence/circumstances to the official government line very interesting. Perhaps small information has been withheld or changed to change the way we see it or react to it.

Here is loose change (a video highlighting said inconsistencies) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE

Now it would be ignorant of me or anyone to take this as gospel. But there are some good points which don't seem to be answered.

Any theories or explanations welcome.
You made the poll public..you lost many respondents, that's it!
16. (Original post by Swimmer)
Even if the governent did do it, just think of how many people would be needed to be involved, you think they all would want 3,000 people dead?, think how would you be able to live with knowing that you killed 3,000 innocent people.
Probably the same way the Bush administration felt after about 100,000 civilians in Iraq died as a result of their invasion, but 33 times less guilty. Besides, the same argument as below applies, someone did it, and someone has to live with the guilt, I don't see why that guilt should be particularly different on whom you are.

(Original post by Guy Secretan)
It would be incredibly difficult for a govenment to organize something like that on a massive scale without it getting out. Also how would they be able to get someone to fly themselves into a building. Saying that they were missiles is ridiculous what would they do with the actual passengers. Saying that they were negligent is fair as they had a lot of warnings but saying that they organized it is a joke.
Consider this, it may be difficult, but yet someone managed it. Whether it was the terrorists, US administration, or any other organisation and they had to keep it secret, and they managed it. Unless you believe that the US government is particularly less competent than other organisations then that's not a valid argument against the conspiracy theories.

The only valid arguments are those based on the evidence, such as the nature of the falls, and so forth. I don't have a strong enough scientific background to assess that evidence but I don't think that leaky fallacious arguments work.
17. [SIZE="6"]Quick questions guyz.

How did the government know it was terrorists?

Oh yeah, I remember.........they found the passports of the terrorists who were flying the planes and managed to somehow identify them even after the buildings temperature reached so high that it melted the steel causing the buildings to collapse, but for some reason the passports were still identifiable.[/SIZE

where are these terrorists then?

america managed to find saddam in a hole in the middle of the iraqi desert, after he had done nothing to america (in terms of killing american people), whereas osama bin laden, the guy who managed to attack one of the biggest towers in america and kill 3000 people, has still not been found?
18. Money makes the world go round
19. (Original post by GeoMyles)
Money makes the world go round
true
20. (Original post by Aj12)
Meh far as I knew a load of crap from the other buildings hit it causing a collapse, which sounds like total BS and properly is.

However I do not accept that the main two towers were brought down by a controlled demolition. It makes no sense at all and the entire idea is completly impraticaly and almost impossible.
oh my god if you think thats how a building would collapse like it did beacuse a lot of stuff hit it you definately need to reasearch.
see what i mean you cant explain how building 7 fell and how larry silverstein the leaseholder got paid big time compensation.
and ill try to get the interview where he said he told them to pull it down.

if the government had no involvement why dont they investigate, why when first responders who were given the green light to clearup, told that the air was safe to breath and up to 50,000 are dieing.
you must think that the government gives a **** about us but they dont.
it's full of people who make promises just to get into power and then break them i.e Nick clegg.
all these cuts,on welfare, healthcare, education,high unemployemnt and the taxes are still going up and the bankers are still getting big bonuses.
taking the power away from the people and giving to the bankers.

all world governments are corrupt and we need to stand up and say no

TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: December 31, 2010
Today on TSR

### Things NOT to do at uni

Have you done any of these?

### How much revision have yr12s done?

Discussions on TSR

• Latest
• ## See more of what you like on The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

• Poll
Useful resources

## Articles:

Debate and current affairs forum guidelines

## Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups
Discussions on TSR

• Latest
• ## See more of what you like on The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

• The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.