For those who aren’t familiar with the term, it means believing something that probably shouldn’t be believed, or being influenced to believe something that’s not necessarily in your best interests.
For those who aren’t familiar with the term, it means believing something that probably shouldn’t be believed, or being influenced to believe something that’s not necessarily in your best interests.
9/11 truther. Missile pods on military jets and fed reserve gold heist. WTC7 got me in. But I was also a welder and I’d been making thermite for fun since I was a teenager so I knew that jet fuel didn’t have to melt steel beams to significantly reduce its tensile strength, just several hundred degrees was enough to weaken steel. And I know the difference between thermite products and liquid aluminium pouring from the buildings, thermite looks like straight up lava, and in any case, you need way, way more thermite to melt through a steel girder than you might expect from watching movies. It takes at least half a kilo just to melt through the hood of a car, let alone and engine block like the anarchist cookbook would have you believe, I know because I did it.
Ok, I’ve always wondered what’s up with WTC7, but I could never be bothered to wade through the noise. What was up with that?
It’s still a very strange looking collapse. But the sort of damage caused to it by two giant skyscrapers collapsing next to and into it must have subjected it to stresses is was never designed to take.
And a raging fire inside the building near it’s base that was left to burn mostly unchecked because most of the firefighters were already killed or their equipment destroyed by towers 1 and 2.
Controlled demolitions target the very weakest parts of a structure, causing a cascading failure throughout the structure. In a huge uncontrolled fire and impact, the same weakest points are by definition the most likely to fail first, so the collapse looks similar. Also WTC7 was built above an existing building, so it’s vertical columns didn’t go straight down into bedrock, they went down to near street level, and then transferred the load horizontally around the existing building. From the outside it looked like a regular rectangle, but on the inside, it effectively had a giant unsupported hole on the inside. Under normal conditions, structurally sufficient, but if you shake the ever loving fuck out of it twice and then light it on fire with no firefighters nearby…
I remember watching one of the Flash animated “truth” “documentaries” on flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon.
It talked about missiles being used and similar stuff, I was 13-14 at the time and I showed my parents, they rightfully explained that this was just a random video that anyone could have made.
They brought up the importance of using trusted sources, but also emphasized that they didn’t have the facts either.
They told me to calm down and wait for verifiable facts to surface.
spongebob meme dot gif tventy foor yeers later…
I once watched a 9/11 truther type program that hand waved away this issue by simply stating the government used “nanothermite”. What is “nanothermite”? It’s thermite but acts in whatever way it needs to when somebody pokes holes in the idea of thermite.
Counter argument: if you did this at home on a hobby budget, imagine what is possible with a high tech lab and a military budget.
Not a terribly convincing start to a hypothesis.
The start was what they achieved with no resources. Keep up.
You are grossly overestimating military budget spending. Now, a private contractor with a government contract, on the other hand, maybe. As long as they didn’t waste it and delivered on schedule. Wait, that doesn’t happen either.
IF a private contractor can hijack 4 planes in the most heavily guarded airspace in the world without scrambling a single defence fighter, then they can source Nanothermite on schedule.
Not saying that happened, but suitable explosives are not the weakest link in the 9/11 conspiracy theories.