We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 2876 comments are related to the topic:
9/11 was it a conspiracy?
9/11 was it a conspiracy?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 2,876
|
By:
what are you on about clockwork
the twin towers were not held up by the outer walls and windows which is where the resistance to the jets entering the buildings came from |
|
By:
The damage was caused by the immense heat released by a near-full load of aviation fuel burning. This melted the supporting structures of the towers.
Hope this helps... ...but it probably won't, unless you go and learn some physics. |
|
By:
And there you have it Ladies and Gentleman of the jury. silence. As they all go scrambling for their favourite "debunking 9/11" sites.
 Bed beckons, as I have to play golf all day tomorrow. By Friday, I expect to see answers to the questions I have posed. Once we have established that the Fairbanks video is fake, we can move on to the next one. Night all. |
|
By:
what a strange bloke!
|
|
By:
With Alan Shepard, Clocky? (I know he's dead, but it doesn't work otherwise!)
|
|
By:
Oh dear, CB. You really don't have a clue and I thought you were joking.
At what temperature does burning aviation fuel burn at Riccardo, you physics expert, you. [:o] |
|
By:
Ahem. I thought I spoke loudly enough... are you hard of hearing?
I haven't felt the need to check any websites as yet, either. The laws of motion, and of thermodynamics, seem to work well enough independently of the internet. |
|
By:
you are correct i don't have a clue what you're on about
hence my questions did you expect the planes to bounce off the towers? |
|
By:
The fact that the aircraft was destroyed and all its occupants killed Clocky, together with the destruction of the towers. Where on earth you get the idea it met no resistance I don't know. It's obviously being meeting it's end on every video or still I've seen.
|
|
By:
I think he's having problems again. He'll be announcing that he will control this thread again soon!
|
|
By:
you physics expert
I think it's time you revealed your occupation and academic credentials, Clocky. It undermines your position otherwise. |
|
By:
Jet fuel's flashpoint is a smidge over room temperature... I can't remember exactly
|
|
By:
Jet A-1 flashpoint 38 C
I confess that I had to look that up... you should try it yourself sometime |
|
By:
'did you expect the planes to bounce off the towers? '
Have to admit that's made me laugh. |
|
By:
physics expert is actually a fair cop, I did tell him to go away and learn some
 I am not an academic physicist. I will back oodles of 1.01 that I know alot more physics than Clockwork does, though... |
|
By:
You should have been around during the moon landing threads, it was like a science lesson, you disproved one scientific 'fact' and he just leapt so something else he'd misunderstood, it went on for days.
"If an object is between you and the sun, light cannot be shining on the side you can see!" Clocky, go to the window, put your hand in front of the sun. Has your hand disappeared?" "Yes well, shadows can't run in different directions!" Cue photo with shadows running in different direction. He actually left the forum (not for the last time!) for about three months after that one. |
|
By:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-jzNfxKSio&feature=related
|
|
By:
Are links not allowed to be posted?
 |
|
By:
Put a full stop in front.
|
|
By:
I'm tempted to say it displeased me, but you just need to put some type in first and then the link on a separate line.
|
|
By:
.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-jzNfxKSio&feature=related
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
try again man
|
|
By:
lol orioles you big meanie!
|
|
By:
http://www.youtube. com/watch?v=Q-jzNfxKSio&feature=related
I have put a space between the dot after youtube and the word com |
|
By:
 |
|
By:
I have not read many of the posts on here, but really need to ask the deluded conspiracy theorists the following...
1.Were you there? 2.Are any of your silly theories and alleged proof born from first hand experience? 3.If the US. government were to spring into action to try and fool everyone, surely they would be able to fool silly, deluded internet forum members who are so gullible that they proboably have never even questioned why Mickey mouse is BIGGER than his dog, yet can sniff out a conspiracy at the drop of a hat! Get a hold of yourselves, did the US. government just assume Bin Laden would take responsibility? idiots, every one of you!!! FOOLS!!! |
|
By:
There are some proper nutters on this thread who haven't got a clue. Kerosene will easily melt steel in the conditions that were seen. If you also take into the kinetic energy of the aircraft, i is even more likely.
Mass approx 70 Tonnes = 70,000kg Velocity approx 300 knots = 150m/s Therefore K.E = 70,000 * 150^2 = 1575000000J Quite a fair bit of energy there..... That's 1000th of the energy of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb...... Steel will melt at about 1800K, so in an adiabatic system (which I know this is not an exact example of) you could get wood to melt steel, kerosene would also "crack" at these temperatures into lighter aliphatic compounds, you would have plenty of heat there, trust me. |
|
By:
Which Bin Laden are you talking about? theres been a few of them over the years!
|
|
By:
"If an object is between you and the sun, light cannot be shining on the side you can see!"
Clocky, go to the window, put your hand in front of the sun. Has your hand disappeared?" No wonder he disappeared |
|
By:
In fairness, he WAS between me and the Sun.
|
|
By:
Stop it!
|
|
By:
Sunset
The `War on Terror`which came because of 9/11 is an everlasting war.The Laws of War have changed because of 9/11. If the US want to accuse a country of harbouring terrorists or have the capabilities of being terrorists,( which is your arguement regarding the war with Iraq comes in to it) then they will invade, set up military bases and the pattern continues. It will happen with Iran. You really need to learn some history. America was invading country's long before 9/11. If they want to invade they will find a reason.They might invade Iran, but more likely Israel will destroy their nuclear capabilities first. They have already done it once with Iraq. |
|
By:
Some of these conspiracy theorist have raised a few interesting questions to suggest that there may be one or two small strange unexplained things (which you would expect anyway when any large scale disaster happens)about that day.
Spot on. However conspiracy theorists, like on this thread, spend far too much time thinking that if they put forward enough evidence that other people/governments/organisations benefited from 9/11 that they are proving that they were behind it. Just because certain parts of government/industry may have benfited financially or politically days, months or years later from 9/11 is not evidence to prove that they were behind it. If my father died in a car crash and everything pointed towards it being an accident, evidence that I may have benefited from his will is only evidence of motive and not evidence that proves I had anything to do with it. Again spot on. Who gained financially from 9/11 .The families of those that died.Especially those who didn't love their husbands or wifes and may be were thinking of getting a divorce. So it must of been these people that planned 9/11 then according to the conspiracy theorists logic.In fact every time there is a accident or some one dies look to see who benefits. then lock those people up for it. they must be the guilty one's. Doesn't matter about evidence or common sense. Only motive matters according to the conspiracy theorists . I'm glad that the conspiracy theorists aren't in charge of our justice system. |
|
By:
Masher
You stated at 22.35 last night that I "believe there was no plane" and that the "witnesses were planted". All I ever said was that I don't believe a plane crashed into the front door of the Pentagon,and I still don't. Regarding the witnesses that say the saw the plane crash into the Pentagon: Yes,I do believe they were planted. You don't have one shred of evidence for this belief. And it goes against all common sense that people like you obviously don't have.How did these 80+ witnesses know when the plane was going to crash into the Pentagon? How did they know that the plane wasn't going to be late? They often take off late. Some of them were driving down the free way. What were they doing just driving up and down waiting for the plane to turn up? Your belief is ridiculous. 99% of the evidence proves your beliefs wrong. To get rid of this evidence you say it's planted or faked. So no amount of evidence will ever be enough to prove your delusional belief wrong because you will just say it's planted or faked. This is a circular argument. And the witnesses that saw the plane on a different flightpath,as in the film you saw?......I'd sooner trust their testimony than the planted witnesses. You are begging the question again. You have not proved they are planted. Sunset I've made no comment on the twin towers.Can we just stick to the Pentagon? I mentioned the twin towers because they are similar to the pentagon attack, so are relevant. Why don't you want to discuss the twin towers? Do you think that terrorists piloted the planes into the twin towers? What about the pilots for 9/11 truth,that say that the flightpath,and angle the plane approached,and entry point of the plane was,in their opinion, impossible given the constraints and manouevarability of the aircraft? The videos from New York clearly show that it is possible. Or are they faked as well? That's your usual cop out when the evidence doesn't sought your theory. |
|
By:
Yes but shrewd dude, not everything does point to 9/11 being an accident this is why millions of people world wide a raising questions.
the vast majority of the evidence does. And experts in the fields of science, engineering, architecture,demolition etc have put together a report of their own, raising issues of inaccuracies in the 9/11 Commission report. They are very much in a minority. You of course ignore what the majority say ,so you can carry on with your delusional conspiracy. |
|
By:
Angel Gabriel Joined: 09 May 05
Replies: 304 18 Aug 10 18:11 Im not sure that anyone has ever debunked this speach. Already been done in this thread. As was pointed out JFK is talking about the Communists. When you listen to the context of the whole speech. Do you ever actually listen and read to any links that are put up on this thread or only the one's that you think support your position? |
|
By:
To Sunset,
Re:The St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church This 4 storey masonry building didn't exactly fall on 9/11, in fact it was crushed by the weight of debris falling from the south tower. What it does show is the forces involved in the twin towers coming down and the damage sustained by the surrounding buildings. Your link also shows this. So I don't find it surprising that WT7 came down considering the damage in sustained and the fire. That's hardly the same as WTC7 coming down, which, when you consider that 2 buildings stood between it One building WT6. And this was severely damaged. The twins towers towered over the surrounding buildings so the fact that one building was between them is not really relevant. and the falling towers still fell without any resistance. Also, those 2 buildings WTC5 and 6 had far more damage from the dbris and had larger fires, yet their steel frames remained standing. Here are some pics of the damage on the site, http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch4.pdf Watch the video on this link. the damage was more severe than you think. http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm |
|
By:
Angel Gabriel Joined: 09 May 05
Replies: 304 18 Aug 10 18:47 Im sure even Sunset agrees that WTC7 was `pulled` Wrong again. He will never admit it though because then it adds further implications, to the events on 9/11. Prior knowledge maybe Ok call me a liar then. No evidence given as per usual. |
|
By:
The fake CBS footage? The fake Fox footage? The fake MSNBC footage? The fake CNN footage?
Oh come on! |