911
See other 911 Articles
Title: Propaganda Can’t Melt Steel Beams
Source:
Kevin Ryan
URL Source: http://digwithin.net/
Published: Dec 20, 2015
Author: Kevin Ryan
Post Date: 2015-12-20 21:04:19 by Operation 40
Keywords: 911, twoofer, sycophant
Views: 16827
Comments: 74
Kevin Ryan at Dig Within, 12/20/2015: Eleven years ago, I initiated a discussion about the fact that jet fuel fires could not have melted steel at the World Trade Center. The government agency investigating the WTC destruction responded by holding “some of its deliberations in secret.” Although it’s not a secret that jet fuel can’t melt steel, due to propaganda from sources like The Washington Post and The Huffington Post, Americans often get confused about what facts like that mean to any national discussion. In a nutshell, what it means is that the molten metal found at the WTC, for which there is a great deal of evidence, cannot be explained by the official 9/11 myth. Today no one thinks that jet fuel fires can melt steel beams—not even The Posts’ new science champion, who doesn’t bother to actually use jet fuel or steel beams to teach us about “retarded metallurgical things.” Instead, he uses a thin metal rod and a blacksmith forge to imply that, if the WTC buildings were made of thin metal rods and there were lots of blacksmith forges there, the thin metal rods would have lost strength and this would be the result. If you buy that as an explanation for what happened at the WTC, you might agree that everyone should just stop questioning 9/11. This absurd demonstration highlights at least two major problems with America’s ongoing struggle to understand 9/11. The first is that there was a great deal of molten metal at the WTC. Those who know that fact sometimes share internet memes that say “Jet Fuel Can’t Melt Steel Beams” when they want to convey that “Thermite Melted Steel at the WTC.” The second major problem is that certain mainstream media sources continue to put a lot of energy into dis-informing the public about 9/11. Sources like The Posts, The New York Times and some “alternative media” continue to work hard to support the official myth of 9/11. That effort is not easy because they must do so while providing as little actual information about 9/11 as possible. The dumbing down of the average citizen is a full time job for such propagandists. Luckily for them, American students receive almost no historical context that encourages them to think critically or consider ideas that conflict with blind allegiance to their government. When it comes to the WTC, it also helps that almost 80% of Americans are scientifically illiterate. As media companies attempt to confuse the public about 9/11, they must avoid relating details that might actually get citizens interested in the subject. For example, it’s imperative that they never mention any of these fourteen facts about 9/11. It is also important to never reference certain people, like the ordnance distribution expert (and Iran-Contra suspect) who managed security at the WTC or the tortured top al Qaeda leader who turned out to have nothing to do with al Qaeda. In fact, to support the official myth of 9/11 these days, media must ignore almost every aspect of the crimes while promoting only the most mindless nonsense they can find. Unfortunately, that bewildering strategy becomes more obvious every day.snip more http://digwithin.net/ Through interviews, presentations, and his work as co-editor at the online Journal of 911 Studies, Mr. Ryan works to bring out the truth behind the events of 9/11/01 for the benefit of all people. http://ultruth.com/Kevin_Ryan.htm For the Unthinking Fuckwit from Purgatory Iron Works and His Idiotic “Jet Fuel” Demonstration OK. So we have another phony, “Redneck Dixon White” fuckwit over at Youtube, a guy by the name of Trenton Tye, who has put together a simpleton’s version of “the Truth” regarding what did or did not happen on 9/11. Tye has taken time from his “busy day” of working on Youtube videos, a whole 2 minutes mind you, to show the public just how stupid “truthers” are when it comes to the steel in the Twin Towers. I, on the other hand, have been researching and writing about those events for the past 8 years and have published over 100 articles of my own work on the subject. Of course, his substance-free and DEEPLY FLAWED demonstration has been latched upon by several main stream media outlets as the end-all be-all “debunking” of the Truth advocates out here who say the key evidence in the demolition of the Twin Towers rests in the melted steel. That is patently false and Tye knows it. This article, which I will try to make into a video if my computer allows it, and which I will direct toward Tye himself, will pick his ignorant argument apart, piece by piece starting with the first thing that came out of his mouth: 1. “If it (9/11) was a conspiracy, I do not care.” Many people do care, Tye, that’s why they spend years researching what happened that day. Because, unlike you, some of us (US) do give a shit about finding out who was responsible for the event that killed so many people in New York, Pennsylvania and DC that day and subsequently launched war after war across the Middle East killing scores more (US troops and civilians alike) and leaving 10 times that number scarred for life (US troops and civilians alike). And that’s too say nothing of the constitutional rights we all had to give up for the Patriot Act or the trillions of dollars of debt your kids will have to pay for the wars, you fucking imbecile. Incontrovertible - New 9/11 Documentary by Tony Rooke Nov 27, 2015 -A film for Coppers & Fire Fighters by Coppers & Fire Fighters. “One of the best 911 movies ever made!” - Kevin Barrett, Truth Jihad Radio "All family members of a 9/11 victim should watch this film." - Matt Campbell, victim family member Tired of anklebiting riff-raff that try to de-rail discussions of the most important event in the last 200 years? Visit https://www.reddit.com/r/911truth for an independent look. Trolls are taken out to the junkyard. No insults permitted. And another site for free thinkers: https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/ <--- 342,067 subscribers, ~1,000 people average on line at all times. That's more than 10x the amount of people that visit a typical popular article at this website, online right now and conspiring to find truth. 
Kevin Ryan is the former Site Manager for Environmental Health Laboratories, a division of Underwriters Laboratories (UL). Mr. Ryan, a Chemist and laboratory manager, was fired by UL in 2004 for publicly questioning the report being drafted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on their World Trade Center investigation. In the intervening period, Ryan has completed additional research while his original questions, which have become increasingly important over time, remain unanswered by UL or NIST.
Posted on December 17, 2015 by willyloman “If it (9/11) was a conspiracy, I do not care.” Trenton Tye,
genius welder "Simply put, this is not just the best film I've seen on 911, it's the best film I have seen all year." - Sergeant John Meaders, 32 year ex Californian police officer
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Operation 40 (#0)
No, it can't. But it sure as hell can divert people people from seeing that they can be weakened by being crashed into by a enormous airplane.
Perhaps this forum's deniers would care to explain what the protuberance on the bottom of that jet is. No commercial passenger jet in the world is configured that way, only military planes.
it's the Being jet's right fairing, a bulge that contains the landing gear.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
yes ,it did not have to melt the steel . But the heat was enough to compromise the structural integrity . You won't find any picture showing any melted steel . But you see many pictures of twisted steel. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Thats what any logical person would conclude. With millions of tons of weight setting on the metal supports how long would it take for the steel to give out? Then the fact that to keep such a secret quiet this long would be near impossible with the amount of man power it would take to compromise both building.
It's a stupid argument anyways. Even if the fire actually could liquefy steel beams, the building would have collapsed long before that point.
1) That teams planted explosives at the exact places the planes would impact without anyone noticing, and the pilots were knowledgeable of and could hit these exact points. Also, you believe for some reason it took many minutes after the planes hit before the explosives detonated. or 2) That teams of explosives experts (that no one noticed) were in place at the points of impact and survived the impact. They then planted and detonated explosives after the impact on a suicide mission. So which one of these scenarios do you believe? And why the need for the planes anyway if the buildings could just brought down with explosives? I'm still waiting for you to tell me which scenario you actually believe. Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
It's hilarious what passes for an expert to those who subscribe to the Official Narrative. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Plenty of opportunity to plant the explosives without anyone noticing. And why would the pilots need to know anything? World Trade Center Employee Discusses pre 9/11 Power Downs WTC cameras, locks, electricity turned off weekend before 9/11 In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Because the pilots hit the buildings at the exact point where you are saying the explosives are. They would have to know where they are to do that. So let me get this straight. You really beleive that teams of demolition experts planted explosives around the 90th floors of these buildings, and they did this without anyone noticing even though this would mean ripping out walls, insulation, and plumbing and electrical conduits. Then someone arranged for planes to hit the buildings at these exact points. And then somehow after the impact of the planes, the explosives were detonated. And you think this scenario makes sense? Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
The only one who has even speculated that is you. No one else has EVER claimed that the explosives were synched up to the planes hitting the buildings. The only thing you've displayed is your woeful lack of research and your reliance on The Pronouncers of Acceptable Opinion to do your thinking for you. In a Cop Culture, the Bill of Rights Doesn’t Amount to Much Maybe light ... reflecting off of the plane - from the sun --- off of the building glass ! Drug diseased brains could build libraries on such nonsense ! If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
LMFAO! Anybody else care to take a WAG?
One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. "Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images—the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching." https://books.google.com/books? id=Vc8DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=Ronald+Greeley,+director+of+the+Space+Photog raphy+Laboratory+at+Arizona+State+University+Boeing+jet's+right+fairing&source=b l&ots=1V-I0RICMI&sig=-eHz2AR595TaUf7anjvOiqnkOkM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjTzNiiz- 3JAhUEGx4KHdvFDkAQ6AEIIjAB#v=onepage&q=Ronald%20Greeley%2C%20director%20of% 20the%20Space%20Photography%20Laboratory%20at%20Arizona%20State%20University% 20Boeing%20jet's%20right%20fairing&f=false Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Debunking the kWaZZy twoofer nonsense
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
There were no pilots. The planes were flown by remote control and guided to their point of impact by a beacon transmitting from the towers. The whole op was run from building 7, which is why it was wired and demo'd.
I find it curious that they went for a joy ride to Ohio first then went to the target. That is strange. You would think that they would go straight for the target so that they don't get shot down. Then the planes at Andrews Air Force base were sent on a mission over the Atlantic Ocean that day. So they were conveniently gone.
So, what you're saying is Boeing 767-200ER's only have landing gear on the right side of the plane. That must have been one of those Polish planes.
The plane that flew to ohio landed in ohio and never left, at least on that day.
Have you ever heard of the explosion at Wright Pat Air Force base on 911. I heard it. It was a huge boom. Then everyone came outside. I can't remember what they said that boom was. I don't know if you are correct about the plane never laving Ohio. How would you know this?
Stoney, if you'll note, Tomder's theory on the bulge under that plane being landing gear won't fly. (pun intended) For starters, 767-200ER's are smooth bellied craft. They have no landing gear fairings. Also, their landing gear is located practically behind the jet's wings, and if you'll look, the "bulge" in photos has it well forward of the wings. That's a military jet, probably a tanker filled with jet fuel.
Why not post some pics to show what you are talking about.
Exactly. That plane is not a standard United 757 or 767. The paint job is proof enough. Someone on another forum has said that he saw a close up of this aircraft on a foreign news broadcast but wasn't taping. It's out there somewhere. The debunkers are challenged to find a single example of this on any commercial airliner. A google image search of 757 or 767 aircraft underside or something should do it.
It was reported as on the ground and passengers disembarked by the flight tower and authorities at Cleveland Municipal airport. Remember when I told you mcgowanjm was a valuable asset to this forum? This is where we could use his assistance, because that guy was a catalog of links and info, but I think he may have finally succumbed to cancer.
Tell me you're joking. Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
A study of the "bulge": Flight 175. Too Hot to Handle Back in June 2003 La Vanguardia in Barcelona, Spain, published an investigative report on the plane that slammed into the South Tower. The report was a simple affair, it used the photo we see here on the left and wondered what these strange objects attached to the underside of the Flight 175 might be, and whether they were just an optical illusion. After a thorough digital image analysis by a Spanish university, the article came to the conclusion that the objects were three-dimensional in nature and could not have been caused by shadows or reflections. Full Stop...snip more PATRONAT MUNICIPAL DE L’ESCOLA ANALYSIS OF THE IMAGES OF 11 SEPTEMBER 2001 To verify the possible presence of objects on the underside of the fuselage of the second plane involved in the attack in New York on 11 September. CONCLUSIONS The same analysis has been performed on various images. The selected images are fragments of photographs of the attack on 11 September and a Boeing 767-300. The studied images are taken from different angles of observation. The detected cylindrical objects cannot be due to shadows caused by the angle of incidence of the sun on the plane, because they always appear to be the same shape and size, though with varying luminosity. The detected objects have varying luminosity around them because they are in relief (this is the only possible explanation). The detected objects are clearly distinct from the landing gear.
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
Wish I could, but I use an old Wii to post and it won't allow me to c&p or link pics. This is why I try to keep my posts brief, but at least I don't have to deal with viruses and security issues.
I have the wii. I got it on opening day when it came out. You don't have a computer to post with? Just a wii? Sounds like a pain in the butt.
You are aware, aren't you, that 4 engine Boeing aircraft have been capable of remote controlled flight since 1984? Now think of the progress in Tech since then. The 2001 Remote tech must have been thousands of times or more better than that in 1984. Controlled Impact Demonstration The Controlled Impact Demonstration (or colloquially the Crash In the Desert) was a joint project between NASA and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aimed at acquiring data, as well as demonstrating and testing new technologies, with the intent of improving occupant crash survivability, by crashing a Boeing 720 aircraft. The tests involved the efforts of NASA Ames Research Center, Langley Research Center, Dryden Flight Research Center, the FAA, and General Electric, and required more than 4 years of work before the test occurred. The aircraft was remotely controlled for the tests, and numerous test runs were undertaken prior to performing the actual impact. During the flights the aircraft made approximately 69 approaches, to about 150 feet (46 m) above the prepared crash site, under remote control. On the morning of December 1, 1984, the test aircraft took off from Edwards Air Force Base, California, made a left-hand departure and climbed to an altitude of 2,300 feet (700 m). The aircraft was remotely flown by NASA research pilot Fitzhugh Fulton from the NASA Dryden Remotely Controlled Vehicle Facility...
He didn't say no pilots were killed. He just said they weren't flying the plane. If he is correct then the pilots you mention would have been murdered when the planes landed somewhere. So it is disingenous of you to say because some pilots did in fact die that they couldn't have been murdered elsewhere. I'm not saying that happened that way. I'm just saying what you posted doesn't disprove anything.
What makes you think I have to believe either of those statements? I want a real investigation, where Bush must testify under oath. Is that so hard to imagine? Still waiting for you to answer this: Why do you think Bush didn't want an investigation into the biggest crime against America in history? Now since I answered your question, please reciprocate. TIA
So it is disingenous of you to say because some pilots did in fact die that they couldn't have been murdered elsewhere. You people are just fucking nuts. There is nothing else to say. Why not just claim aliens flew them to the moon? There's Occam's razor ( the simplest explanation is probably correct). You guys subscribe to Macco's razor. The most bizarre unrealistic unprovable explanation must be correct to you loons. Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
There was an investigation, nut job.
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
Maybe. Maybe not. If you hijacked a plane. Would you fly to your target. Or go for a 40 min to 1hr joy ride over Ohio first? There are to many coincidences to just dismiss. I don't know what really happened and neither do you.
Your comment is disingenous again. You say because there as an investigation that proves it. Lots of things are investigated. For you to be consistent your position has to be that all investigations lead to the truth.
The NTSB reported both jets speed at 540 mph at impact. Commercial jets like 767's don't have the muscle to achieve those speeds at cruising altitude, let alone the heavier air at 1000 ft. They're designed for efficiency. Military planes, otoh, are operating on our dime, so they don't have to concern themselves with fuel efficiency. They're built for performance. Of course, my theory goes out the window if you're willing to suspend the laws of physics as the pro-government conspiracy theorists have tried to do. Hell, on that magical day, they had 110 story buildings just miraculously collapsing freefall speeds for no reason.
Never heard of that. By the way I'm not crazy. A little mean and my words are venemous at times though.
The NTSB reported both jets speed at 540 mph at impact. Commercial jets like 767's don't have the muscle to achieve those speeds at cruising altitude, let alone the heavier air at 1000 ft. They're designed for efficiency. Military planes, otoh, are operating on our dime, so they don't have to concern themselves with fuel efficiency. They're built for performance. Of course, my theory goes out the window if you're willing to suspend the laws of physics as the pro-government conspiracy theorists have tried to do. Hell, on that magical day, they had 110 story buildings just miraculously collapsing at freefall speeds for no reason.
There was a rumor floating around that a plane had crashed and exploded out by the VA Hospital on the 35 Bypass west of Dayton. Film crews responded and found out it was BS... I was sitting out on the back porch when 2 F16s flew over (about 1700-1730hrs) heading from West to East and they were breaking the sound barrier, sonic booms... IIRC they were from the National Guard Base out on 73 south of Springfield... Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Yeah it sounded kind of like that.
Comments (42 - 74) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestPropaganda Can’t Melt Steel Beams
#2. To: Operation 40 (#0)
#3. To: Logsplitter (#2)
#4. To: rlk (#1)
Propaganda Can’t Melt Steel Beams No, it can't. But it sure as hell can divert people people from seeing that they can be weakened by being crashed into by a enormous airplane.
#5. To: tomder55 (#4)
yes ,it did not have to melt the steel . But the heat was enough to compromise the structural integrity . You won't find any picture showing any melted steel . But you see many pictures of twisted steel.
#6. To: rlk (#1)
"No, it can't. But it sure as hell can divert people people from seeing that they can be weakened by being crashed into by a enormous airplane."
#7. To: Operation 40 (#0)
Since it is clearly evident that the collapse of the towers started at the point of plane impact in both towers, you have to believe one of two things if you believe they were brought down by a demolition:
#8. To: Operation 40 (#0)
OK. So we have another phony, “Redneck Dixon White” fuckwit over at Youtube, a guy by the name of Trenton Tye, who has put together a simpleton’s version of “the Truth” regarding what did or did not happen on 9/11.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#9. To: no gnu taxes, Operation 40, logsplitter (#7)
1) That teams planted explosives at the exact places the planes would impact without anyone noticing, and the pilots were knowledgeable of and could hit these exact points. Also, you believe for some reason it took many minutes after the planes hit before the explosives detonated.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#10. To: Deckard (#9)
And why would the pilots need to know anything?
#11. To: no gnu taxes (#10)
(Edited)
Because the pilots hit the buildings at the exact point where you are saying the explosives are.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#12. To: Logsplitter (#2)
the protuberance on the bottom of that jet
#13. To: tomder55 (#3)
#14. To: Logsplitter (#13)
#15. To: Deckard (#11)
#16. To: no gnu taxes (#10)
#17. To: Logsplitter (#16)
#18. To: tomder55 (#14)
#19. To: A K A Stone (#17)
#20. To: Logsplitter (#19)
#21. To: A K A Stone (#17)
#22. To: Logsplitter (#21)
#23. To: Logsplitter (#2)
No commercial passenger jet in the world is configured that way, only military planes.
#24. To: A K A Stone (#20)
(Edited)
#25. To: Logsplitter (#16)
There were no pilots. The planes were flown by remote control and guided to their point of impact by a beacon transmitting from the towers. The whole op was run from building 7, which is why it was wired and demo'd.
#26. To: tomder55 (#14)
The Photo that Shook Spain
http://www.amics21.com/911/flight175/ 
UNIVERSITARIA POLITÉCNICA DE MATARÓ
http://www.amics21.com/911/report.html
#27. To: Logsplitter (#16)
There were no pilots.
#28. To: A K A Stone (#22)
#29. To: Logsplitter (#28)
#30. To: no gnu taxes (#25)
Boeing 720 flying under remote control
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Impact_Demonstration
#31. To: no gnu taxes (#27)
#32. To: no gnu taxes (#7)
I'm still waiting for you to tell me which scenario you actually believe.
#33. To: A K A Stone (#31)
He didn't say no pilots were killed. He just said they weren't flying the plane. If he is correct then the pilots you mention would have been murdered when the planes landed somewhere.
#34. To: Operation 40 (#32)
#35. To: no gnu taxes (#33)
You people are just fucking nuts.
#36. To: no gnu taxes (#34)
(Edited)
There was an investigation, nut job.
#37. To: no gnu taxes (#27)
#38. To: no gnu taxes (#33)
There's Occam's razor ( the simplest explanation is probably correct).
#39. To: no gnu taxes (#27)
#40. To: A K A Stone (#20)
#41. To: CZ82 (#40)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]