911 Conspiracy, What are your views on the professional evidence?

Question

Open question.

I don't want people to consider the Loose Change videos as evidence. Nobody mention Loose Change.

I want people to consdier the official investigators evidence.

I don't want to believe the conspiracy theory. However could somebody explain their views on the molton steel found still burning at 1000s of degrees in the basement levels without a steady supply of oxygen 2 weeks into clearing Ground Zero. The official investigators evidence supports the theory. What are your views?

AS REQUESTED:

Here is the main source as a streaming video. The evidence is presented by:

Frank Gayle

PROJECT LEADER, WTC Investigation
NIST Metallurgist

The video link is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pn4ltRSTF8&mode=related&search=

The molton steel section is at the end of the video.

I have not asked you if I am "buying the theory". I am asking you if the project leader of the WTC investigation is wrong? I am asking your views on the molton steel. I am asking your views on the investigators evidence.

Answer 1

No one wants to believe this was a conspiracy, but there are some things that just will not go away. The explosions seen and heard by the firemen: The Molten metal flowing from the south tower: The owners confession: The buildings freefall: and of course that molten metal found under each building.

All the solid evidence I have seen on video (not hearsay) show all three WTC buildings were most probably professionally demolished, and not part of a collapse. The following is a short summary of evidence I have found.

EVIDENCE
There are many factors that do not fit the official story. They include, secondary explosions that were seen, heard, reported, and recorded by firefighters, in and around the WTC buildings.
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-4574366633014832928&q=firefighter+bombs+in+the+building
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcRs1fv8i3I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHz9YWVgJWM

Here is a video clip showing a trail of explosions just before the destruction wave.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_DkzhonpGY&mode=related&search=

Molten, beyond red hot, "steel" was video recorded coming out of the South Tower just before it collapsed. Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to turn steel to liquid. Melted red hot steel was also found in "ground zero" of all three WTC buildings, including WTC7; the one no jet ever hit.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ExrVgioIXvk&search=thermite
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3D2myMbQjQ

FORENSICS
A chemical analysis of the solidified molten iron,conducted by independent firms, yielded an explosive, called Thermite. Also found was a WTC core beam; most probably cut using the demolition cutting charge (Thermate). No core beams were left standing beyond a few feet high, for it to have been cut by an Iron Workers torch.
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_charges.html

CONFESSION
We also have a video recording, where owner Larry Silverstein, admits to demolishing WTC7.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7750532340306101329

MOTIVE
The New Conservatives, started planning the invasion of Iraq, even before Pres. Bush took office. Apparently, the plan would include the attack of the WTC buildings. It did this to get the support of congress and the nation, to attack Iraq. Read it from their own PENAC document. Pay special attention to the section entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force" page 50 and the top of page 51, where it states we need a new Pearl Harbor attack to get the ball rolling.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

OPPORTUNITY
Witnesses saw a work crew going into the WTC buildings with rolls of wire, supposedly for internet upgrades. Tenants were moved around while crews "upgraded" the cable systems. The Port Authority cut power to the building for a whole weekend, just prior to the attack; shutting down the entire security systems. Witnesses also heard crews operating heavy hammering equipment that left a gray cement like dust, in the building. This activity took place just weeks before the 911 attack: The Port Authority had released control of the buildings to Larry Silverstein, six weeks prior to the attack: He made upwards of $5 billion off of the attack.
See "9/11 Mysteries" video: Time = 1:03:55 through 1:07:00 and 1:19:55 through 1:24:09
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=911+mysteries&hl=en-CA

Answer 2

Greetings, I'm not understanding your motivation in this statement, nor am I understanding why the distinguished Professor Jones would risk his career if he was uncertain about his conclusions. The details Professor Jones has provided is very credible and persuasive to me. It's wonderful to have someone with such excellent credentials stand up and express a challenge to this popular rumor which has gained enormous momentum (pun intended). I'm a bit tired of people simply saying they are the experts and just trust them. Professor Jones has clearly laid out his claims, fortunately. Can you refute some of his 13 points? I'd like to be able to convince myself that Jones is wrong, because I would like to believe that the airplane collisions were the cause of the collapse of the three buildings. Given your outstanding credentials, I was hoping that you to be able to find or generate a persuasive computer model for the collapse. I'm very interested in how the buildings collapsed at free fall speed? I assume that you do not support the pancake theory offered by the 911 Commission report. But, can you offer us a plausible theory that does not involve demolition? In order for the building to collapse at near-free fall speed, I believe that most of the 47 steel support columns had to be destroyed at many levels. Alternatively, the floors would have to become detached at multiple levels. Which is correct or is there another theory? The NOVA special showed how the floors could become detached causing a free fall speed of the floors. The only problem is that the 47 steel support columns would have remained up and mostly intact. Why was the support structure destroyed. I cannot pretend to have the same credentials that you have, but even a Physics 101 student can determine that the official "pancake theory" is obviously flawed and the floor detachment theory has the 47 steel support column flaw. Can you help me understand how the buildings collapsed at free fall speed and why they fell straight down? I'm a skeptic, so I need something substantial. Right now, Professor Jones is the only expert that has presented a coherent and rational explanation. The official explanations have all come up way short. Unfortunately, the few sentences that you've included here are not persuasive. Please publish more. I do want to be convinced that Professor Jones is wrong!

Answer 3

the problem is when the government is confronted with the evidence they have no answer. there are so many problems with the official story that any smart person can see that they are lying. the biggest hole in the story is building 7. most people have no idea about this and in the 9-11 report it was never mentioned. not once but that day it fell down with the other two towers. the evidence that the gov is covering up something is more then i could possibly type. loose change is a good film to open someones eyes to the lies that are being told around you. a real good film that goes into much more detail and has professional people in telling you what happened is 911 mysteries part 1 demolitions. go to google video and watch it for free. you want to learn more try infowars.com or 911truth. the government has told its story and has changed it when it sees a problem. bush said there was no bombs in the buildings and a few years later he says well there might be bombs. more and more people are waking up the idea that they were lied to for the purpose a stronger government and less civil liberties.

Answer 4

Do you know this for a fact or is it a factoid?
There is a steady supply of oxygen anywhere there is not a vacuum. Why has no one else heard of these 1000s degree fires. Sounds like you have already bought into the conspiracy theory.
Enough facts can be twisted and turned to make someone believe anything. Especially if they are said often and loud enough.
What official investigators are you talking about? Where is the report published?

Answer 5

I am open to all views but I think you are wrong to discredit LC and the other videos, they ensure that people do question and debate their own ideas. I am new to this conspiracy theory stuff but I have always been sensitve to the idea that the Pentagon attack seems so NOT covered by video etc. I cannot believe that a sensitive place such as the pentagon does not have more camera and video footage of the strike by a 757. Something does not quite add up and it is important that we question and consider what really happened. The basement levels stuff - would they have been fed by air from the underground stations at the base of the towers?

Answer 6

I watched 'a little bit' of a program about this last night on TV.

For any government to consider this leads to me thinking that they should not be in Government. Let alone walk on this planet.

I do not know much on this but I still think that it was terrorism. But saying this they showed some explosions on one of the floors before the one tower collapsed. Makes me wonder.

Not much of an answer but I have said what I need.

Answer 7

Any conspiracy as large as the one that people suggest regarding 9/11 would have too many mouths to keep shut and there fore is just a fantasy of the blame America first crowd

Answer 8

They are theories that haven't been proven. Evidence that supports their claims has never been recognized by anyone, including them, as proof.

Answer 9

there are a number of theories out there and i confess i don't know exactly what you refer to. if you post a link i would check it out and comment?

Answer 10

first there was the JFK theory then the Apollo theory now the 9/11 theory there is always people who say different