Re: 9/11 Moment of silence
Alright, I know this post is quite long, but if you're interested in the 9/11 stuff I suggest you read it. I was bored and wrote this up in response to some posts here instead of doing homework. =p Shouldn't be much controversial here, just some information and fun facts.
D-Nox;784620 said:
after watching the moment of the fall in slow motion, you are able to see that there were several dynamites exploding in the base of the building. Do you really think an Arab could pass the towers security and plant them there?
The so called explosions that can be seen as the towers fall are bursts of air caused by the weight of the falling debris rapidly compressing the air within the building. This is what I assumed when I saw the puffs coming out of the base and below the falling debris before I had read the different conspiracy theories, and this is what the official explanation is.
woodycook;784626 said:
More like military grade nano-thermite.
(which the rubble of the WTC was tested POSITIVE for)
You know, I'm not a professional engineer so I can't really explain too much about the collapse. (but here ARE 1300 professional architects and engineers that say the official story is BS:
http://www.ae911truth.org/)
The same argument was used about the crashing of the Hindenburg. Thermites can consist of a diverse range of fuels and oxidizers, the majority of which could be found almost anywhere. Take the most common one, I mean the one most people somewhat know, aluminium-iron(III) oxide. The chemicals react like this.
Fe2O3 + 2Al → 2Fe + Al2O3 + heat
Lets take that apart a bit for the non scientists.
Fe2O3 is Iron(III) Oxide, also known as Hematite, and is the mineral that the steel industry gets the majority of its iron from. We also know Fe2O3 as rust, although this is a simplification. Rust contains a large amount of Fe2O3 and other iron oxides. This is the oxidizer in this reaction. 2AL is of course pure aluminum. The two are mixed into a fine powder and heated to start the reaction. The reaction results in pure Iron and Aluminum Oxide, and what we're interested in, massive amounts of heat.
Nano-thermite is one of the keywords here, referring to thermite where the Iron(III) Oxide and Aluminum are present in nano-particle form. This means the individual particles are between 1 and 100 nanometers in size, an extremely fine powder. This means that they react easier, faster, and stronger. That would be a big advantage, I can say from personal experience that getting a normal Iron(III) Oxide thermite reaction started can be a bitch, propane torches can work but it's difficult, the times I've done it in classes we've used exothermic magnesium reactions (If I remember that part correctly, who really thinks of how the reaction is started when you're waiting to watch things be melted =p) Anyways, all the info aside nanoparticles may seem like they'd have to be man-made but they can and do exist in nature abundantly, it's just getting a large amount together for the reaction that would be difficult. I would say that it's likely that evidence of nanothermite could be found at the site whether or not it was used, I bet evidence of nanothermite could be found at most steel structure fires.
As a little at home experiment try and find a rusty piece of metal somewhere, I used a tube-anchor, and wrap it with aluminum foil. Then take a metal hammer (preferably rusty too, might be more difficult if you take care of your tools unlike my family =D) and strike it against the object. If done correctly you'll see a small spark and the area of the aluminum foil where you struck will look slightly burned/melted. This is a tiny thermite reaction. After completion please await the arrival of government agencies to arrest you for being a terrorist.
woodycook;784611 said:
What I can say is jet fuel (kerosene) does not burn hot enough to weaken fire resistant construction grade steel which begins to weaken around 2700 degrees F while jet-fuel TOPS OUT at 1700. Office fires? 600-700 degrees. We are missing about a 1000 degrees here, folks.
And
How/why did building 7 fall? (yes, a third building fell on 9-11... no plane hit it)
Steel begins to melt at (arguably, depends on the grade/type) 2700 degrees. The office fires + fuel averaged something like 1200 degrees. But, as I believe someone has brought up here, you don't need to reach the melting point to significantly damage the integrity. Take blacksmiths, the metals they use are not brought anywhere near their melting points. The 2700 degree range is also based on the heat-resistant coating on the steel, much of which was stripped by the impact of the places (only around the impact of course). Either way, it's a bit like a domino effect. People say that the collapses look too much like controlled demolitions, but my favorite explanation I've heard for this is simply: “That's kind of how large buildings tend to fall”.
Trade centers 1, 2 and 7 all had their structural integrity compromised by damage. 1 and 2 by the planes, and with 7 the north side was almost completely destroyed by the collapse of the tower 2. As the fires within tower 7 raged, it's owner decided that enough lives had been lost that day and told the fireman to pull out and let it burn down.
EDIT -----> I wanted to add this because I just read a couple of the posts immediately before mine and thought about it. Regarding anything referring to the type of damage caused and the remains identified of the planes, theres a few things you have to take account of. First of all, planes are extremely flimsy, they're not made to impact anything. Any videos you've seen of planes hitting runway and skidding hundreds of yards in whole chunks / fireballs share one common theme, the planes were at a landing or takeoff angle and speed; meaning they were going relatively slow and at a low angle.
As the planes are flimsy, at the speeds they were going when they hit steel structures as in the world trade center, or the network of support columns as in the Pentagon, and the hard dirt in the case of the one that crashed into the field, they are almost vaporized. You have a better chance of finding body pieces than part of the plane. Specific to the Pentagon plane, it hit at a very sharp angle, and wing marks wouldn't be too evident, although they can be seen. There is also some controversy around a almost perfect hole found deeper into the Pentagon, raising suspicion of internal bombs. This can be explained by the way the plane struck the building, causing it to be as said before almost vaporized, and leaving just a shaft of plane parts, debris, and fire shooting through the building. Where it finally stopped at that wall it left that mark.
_____________________________________________________________
I wont address any of the specific political stuff, but I will give my broad opinion. 9/11 was an event that shocked us to the core, I was 10 years, 10 months, 13 days old when it occurred, and I remember it as clearly as any memory from within the last year. Events like this, we don't want to believe that they can happen without some vast conspiracy, it weakens our belief in the foundations of our lives, and theres a limit to which the majority of us will allow that to happen. The reason we have conspiracy theories is the same reason we have religion.
The reality is, Bush was just as much as he looked to be, as much as you can say that about any president. He was not some master manipulator, and no matter where you look you will not be able to follow the strings of our lives to some grand puppet master. Our government is not some vast omniscient, omnipotent entity; it is a collection of individuals, each with their own motives and agendas, and there is no possibility of dozens of people working together to so perfectly cover up such a conspiracy if it exists. When three politicians sit down at a table, there you will find at least five conflicting factions.
I don't know if I can say either way if I am personally for or against the war. While I believe mistakes were and still are being made, I believe in the reasons why we are still there. Heres what I believe in, from our declaration of independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
"that all men are created equal"
Where do we draw the line with this? Who is an American and who is not? Myself, I see America not as a collection of lands, but as a collection of ideals. Every person in the world has these rights, all men are (all mankind is) created equal. I believe as Americans it is our duty to find and stamp out these human rights violations, and that we should be proud to do so. The costs are of course high, which is true of anything worth doing; as Jefferson said: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Anyways, I'll end my post for now, as I've gotten a bit on a rambling course, and need to get back to schoolwork. (yay, Psychology =/)