Club Conspiracy Forums

Club Conspiracy Forums (
-   General Conspiracy Discussion (
-   -   Physics Forum against free speech (

07-12-2005 11:21 PM

Physics Forum against free speech
I've belonged to a physics forum for awhile now, that is sponsored by DR Michio Kaku, my usual post dealt with theories like red shift,blue shift,gamma ray burst, thermodynamics,etc..., well I finally decided to post a question about the collapse of building 7, nothing like what we talk about, just simple questions , like how did the building fall at free fall speed when no plane had hit it and it only had a couple of small fires in it, it appeared on the site for a blink of the eye, and I was given a warning that basicly said that in essence this topic is verbolten, it also said that if I believed the action was not right I could challange it, when I wrote back to the censors, they decided not to reply to my concerns, the site is at
WHAT ARE THEY AFRAID OF? THE TRUTH, PEOPLE WITH DEEP PHYSICS BACKGROUNDS BECOMING MORE AWARE, I had also put on it a link to the video that showed it fall.

truebeliever 07-13-2005 12:51 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Like ya style TLH.

Very interesting.

Will check it out.

truebeliever 07-13-2005 01:19 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
I posted a similar question here...

WTC Metal Fatigue. How Did Building 7 Fall?

Building 7 was hit by no aircraft or debris. It had several small fires and amazingly collapsed in symmetrical fashion at free fall speeds.

We saw in Madrid a building burn at intense levels for MANY hours but not collapse.

Is there any scientific explanation for such a catastrophic structural failure in a largely steel building?

I am concerned. Friends and family work in similar structures. It seems strange that I see little debate on such an important subject...a modern steel structure completely collapsing after a few small fires ignite.

I have read the official reports. They summize they cannot explain the collapse.

Does anyone know of any other reports that could shed some light on such an important subject? Does anyone here have a view on how steel could collapse in such a sudden, catastrophic manner?

I'm under Noddy.

Lets see how long it lasts. Put up 1520hrs my time.

nomad 07-13-2005 04:53 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Believe it or not, the ENTIRE Physics field was

hijacked by the NWO over 100 years ago and ALL

the physics books in the ENTIRE education system

has been falsified and its lead false prophet is

Albert Einstein.

igwt 07-13-2005 05:00 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Seems like everything is stage managed. See this article.

Army 'psyops' at CNN
News giant employed military 'psychological operations' personnel

07-13-2005 05:43 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
I can't believe they let yours stay up, I don't get it, the person who flagged mine was ZapperZ, I'll try to reply to yours today, and see if it gets posted, or if I get another warning.
Everyone should reply to this post, but use facts, not for rants.
PS, your post sounds good.

truebeliever 07-13-2005 05:59 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Just timing probably.

I'm in West Oz. Perhaps I posted in the wee small "editing" hours.

I purposely made it fairly tame. As if I did'nt already know...

Give it 24hours.

nomad 07-13-2005 06:46 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Listen to 8 hours of Explosive inside information ... I believe video 7 or 8 has
a mention about Einstein being part of the NWO
gang of degenerates ... _Ops_Underground

truebeliever 07-13-2005 06:47 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech

07-13-2005 11:33 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
For science advisors and mentors, these guys at physics forum sure are in need of a reality check, I think their NSA?

nohope187 07-13-2005 05:54 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech

Torchlithill wrote:
I can't believe they let yours stay up, I don't get it, the person who flagged mine was ZapperZ, I'll try to reply to yours today, and see if it gets posted, or if I get another warning.
Everyone should reply to this post, but use facts, not for rants.
PS, your post sounds good.
It worked for True cuz yours was too obvious. You must learn to be subtle grasshopper. Only then will you know the way of the Jedi. :-P

nohope187 07-13-2005 05:57 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech

nomad wrote:
Believe it or not, the ENTIRE Physics field was

hijacked by the NWO over 100 years ago and ALL

the physics books in the ENTIRE education system

has been falsified and its lead false prophet is

Albert Einstein.
I'll drink to that. :pint:

07-13-2005 06:08 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Actually the post I tried to post about a month ago was mild compared to todays

truebeliever 07-13-2005 07:24 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech

I'll drink to that.
You'll drink to anything.

I think it's just simply timing. No one in authorities seen it. I bet they want to keep the whacky "conspiricy theorists" out of the forum.

I bet they were a little pissed and hoped you'd just go away.

They see another post...tempered, and seemingly sincere...and just hope, if they ignore it, NOTHING will happen.

How about people start sending in REALLY subtle, sincere sounding replies like..."yeh, i always wondered about that too. Maybe there's was a design fault and they're trying to avoid litigation. Is it possible the Steele used was not smelted and tempered in the correct fashion. This is an importent subject that needs to be addressed. Can anyone with Metallurgical or engineering qualifacations please help?"

HA ha ha we can have some fun with them. Real subtle like.

Who's in?

nohope187 07-13-2005 07:29 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
I'm no physics buff but, yeah, I could pull it off cause I'd be looked upon as a dumbass. :-P

07-13-2005 09:45 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Earlier I contacted someone who has done documentaries on 911, and sent them the link to the gov pdf they refer too,and the link to the physics forum, so it's possible that they may get on there and rip em a new a hole, I should get a response back tomorrow, the 14th, if I do I'll let you know.

igwt 07-13-2005 10:40 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech

truebeliever wrote:
I posted a similar question here...

WTC Metal Fatigue. How Did Building 7 Fall?

I'm under Noddy.

Lets see how long it lasts. Put up 1520hrs my time.
Well it's on for young and old over at Physics Forum
LOL ;~)

truebeliever 07-13-2005 11:36 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
From the Physics Forum...

G'Day Russ.

I worked for many years in "Fire Assay"...that is melting stuff in 1300c firnaces to see what was in them.

I also transfered into Shotfiring where I got to blow things up on a regular basis including packing plastic type explosive - "Power Gel" - around objects to blast them apart and make the way clear for large vehicles.

You soon learn the power of explosives as you can make them cut like a knife through objects of any sought.

Anyway...i watched that building fall. What cant be explained to me is it's symmetrical collapse. How could metal POSSIBLY fail in such a symmetrical fashion? I note that the central core went first as is evident by the video and the "penthous" failing first.

I know what heat does Russ. I know that a few fires, which were only just visible, whether fueled by a bit of deisel or not, are EXTREMELY unlikely to "weaken" support core structures to that extent in THAT short a time.

Large metal beams can dissapait heat easily. If it was that easy to "melt" or "weaken" metal to such a point then I guess we can dispense with the well insulated metal furnaces i used to use and the high pressure natural gas feed and just chuck some deisel on top of the samples I used to melt.

Please keep your arrogant and paternalistic tone to yourself.

You find the fact that finding out how such a large metal structure somehow a waste of time and bothersome?

I guess you must work at NASA as they seem to have the same attitude when it comes to probing into the causes of things.

I am interested in hearing from people involved in the metal trade, particularly those involved in fatuige testing metal materials...if they come here.

I appreciate your input Russ but can you please bottle the paternalistic tone.

I want to know how that building collapsed. We saw other buildings TRASHED by WTC debris which were kind enough to remain standing and indeed retain there structural integrity enough to be rebuilt.

I know what the heat requirements are to weaken metal and join points.

And as for your claim that the reports mentioned 5-6 floors had CRITICAL structural members which were on fire, this in NO way explains the symetrical and catastrophic collapse of WTC 7. In NO WAY does this explain it.

In fact they cant explain it Russ. Thats the point. All your arguments are null and void as in the end the reports DO NOT claim to know the cause.

"They" cannot help. Can anyone else here?
Dear Russ,

This is off point but it is one you have made with some certainty.

You claim fire fighters in Building 7 reported that the fires were such that the building was in danger of collapsing.


You seem to trust the opinion of firefighters.

In that case we seem to have a problem of sorts with your logic.

It is WELL reported and ON THE RECORD that firefighters in the towers reported small fires that would be easily contained and extinguished. It is also ON THE RECORD that not ONE firefighter believed there was ANY chance of those buildings collapsing. Minutes later the first of the Towers suffered a catastrophic collapse.

Which will it be?

Or will you simply be picking and choosing your line of thought to suit yourself?

And by the way...i do not appreciate being accused of being a "whacky conspiricy theorist" because I WANT TO KNOW how those buildings collapsed. ESPECIALLY BUILDING 7.

And why we're on the subject of fire fighters opinions, you are aware of the fact the the premiere firefighting magazine called the report..."a half baked farce".

I demand answers. Thats why I'm here.

And here I edit question your logic...what exactly was burning in those buildings to make large steel girders buckle? To make bolts the size of my fist and weld joints split and crack? Carpet? Wooden furniture? Deisel?

Diesel is a relatively LOW volatility fuel but if it were feeding those fires we would have seen a fire ball in short order...agreed? Or is there some other laws of the Universe you wish to postulate?

As for Building 7 being PELTED by debris...please direct me to the photographs and video showing large scale structural damage to Building 7?

I dont know what you rqualifacations are Russ but mine are pretty good. Especially the qualifacation as a free thinking human with an expansive frontal lobe able to spot "over intellectualized bulldust" when I see it.

igwt 07-14-2005 12:11 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
The WMV from Prison Planet is very interesting. Wonder what they'll have to say about it now.

Here is the link for anyone wishing to view it.

truebeliever 07-14-2005 09:58 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
I do not know how to operate the functions here...quotes i am at a disadvantage. Also...i must earn a living.

Forgive my tone as I am sick and tired of being labelled a "Conspiracy Theorist" because "experts" were quite specific in that they COULD NOT explain the collapse.

As for my use of "fatigue"...excuse me...but does not a metal structure, exposed to RAGING inferno's "fatigue"...

Where do you get the %90 sure from? From your head? Your OWN intuition?

You are a scientist when it suits and a "intuitive" when it suits, while you accuse me of attachment to the latter.

You know DAMN well "experts" were rubbing their heads with DISBELIEF when the Towers came down and ESPECIALLY when 7 came down.

Did the premiere fire fighting magazine label the investigation into the Towers and 7 collapses a "FARCE" or not? Actually, it was ..."a half baked farce". So sure of the data Russ? Coz that is what you're going on with such pious surety. Are you a man of science or just using the second hand "half baked farce" data and adding in your OWN intuition?

The constant mantra is that this event was "unique". What claptrap! You do not need an EXACT previous event to enable you to come to some viable conclusions! Is science forever reinventing the wheel from scratch? How much data is available from 100's of years of building structures? How much data is available from the study of metals under stress? How much data is available from the military on the penetrative qualities of various moving objects? The data available which could be put to use is endless. The practical knowledge of the many disciplines is endless.

Of course, if you are conducting a "half baked farce" your ability to combine data and come to conclusions is SEVERELY hampered.

The fire fighters never got to the fires? Well, well Russ. Go to a google search and find the transcripts and MP3 files where you will hear with your own ears firefighters stating CLEARLY that the fires were small and easily containable. The fire fighters are also clearly heard stating what "they" beleived to be explosions going off in the Towers.

You will find COUNTLESS, on the record comments by fire fighters and engineers (including the builder of the Towers) that they never thought for a second those towers would come down. And then their is the "free fall", CATASTROPHIC collapse.

The Towers were hit by a "hollow" aluminium tube designed to fly through the air....not a oversized DU penetrator rod from a Abrams main battle tank. They carried EXTREMELY low volatility jet fuel of which the majority burned outside the building. People are CLEARLY seen at the impact point of the aircraft indicating NO inferno "weakening" HUGE central and outer columns.

As for the 22,000 gallons of deisel in building it not reasonable to expect if this "container" was "feeding" the fires that we would have seen a massive fireball well BEFORE the 7 hours had passed? Would not the fires have made their way, as they do, to the source, and over a period of time heated the 22,000 gallon container to the point of a massive explosion? Whether low volatility deisel or not. After all, these fires weakened MASSIVE steel beams to the point of failure and did so, so the building collapsed in a PERFECTLY symmetrical pattern (of course someone stated there was in fact a kink, woopdy). I see what i can see.

I know many EXPERTS...

When in doubt..."FUDGE THE NUMBERS".

"Hey Bob! These results ar'nt very statistically significant, pass me the other software package...we'll keep that funding yet."

I take it you are familiar with the Oklahoma city bombing? Where a low velocity Ammonium Nitrate Fuel Oil truck bomb is supposed to have demolished the reinforced concrete columns of a large building from up to 100ft away? The just retired head of Airforce Weapons Testing considered the "official" report a "joke". Explosive charges were CLEARLY placed directly on the columns and it was reported far and wide that several more "unexploded" devices had been removed by authorities. This "official" report, another "fully baked farce" stands in open contrast to the OBVIOUS facts known by ANYONE who works with explosives. The official report is TOTAL so many...

They spent a HUGE amount more on why the shuttle disintergrated (dragged kicking and screaming mind you) but "starved" the investigators of the collapse of the WTC buildings of funds to the point where MANY quit in disgust. a internet search. ALL mainstream articles.

The key to your OWN hubris and OWN downfall is the fact that you rely on a report, described by MANY "EXPERTS" as a "half baked farce". You rely on data that is described as a "half baked farce". Your data is therefore a "farce" and your conclusions OBVIOUSLY so.

Your conclusion is cast in stone based on the fact that you cannot see what is before your eyes because you cannot make the next leap. It is simply out of your narrow paradigm and would involve a "reasonably" broad knowledge of geo-politics, economics and history plus a good dose in the psychology of tyrants and their tactics. My house wife Mother possesses this.

Again is there ANY "specialists" out their familiar with the qualities of metals under stress who can cast some light on the "symetrical free fall" of Building 7 which was hit with debris causing MINOR damage at best, alight on several floors burning carpet, wood, fittings etc...alledgedly/maybe being fed by a 22,000 gallon store of deisel which remained UNAFFECTED by said RAGING INFERNO's progress.

A steel structure has collapsed under dubious circumstances. Funding for an investigation was with held. Experts in the field consider the OFFICIAL REPORT a "half baked farce". Perhaps some simple testing of identical structures on a small scale can shed some light on the mystery.

Thank you Fran Lepton for your input. A good question.

truebeliever 07-14-2005 10:04 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech

For science advisors and mentors, these guys at physics forum sure are in need of a reality check, I think their NSA?
Not nescessary TLH.

They're just arrogent scientists. They're all like it. Specialized and narrow minded. They have NO knowledge of history and politics and their life experiences are limited.

I would'nt care but these sociopaths keep inventing things like atomic bombs and gene manipulation.

truebeliever 07-14-2005 10:57 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Sorry, i blew it.

Could'nt contain myself.

This is Russ, the Super Mentor: Since you have now confirmed our suspicions that you believe that WTC7 (and, you implied, WTC1 & 2) were felled in a controlled demolition, the term "conspiracy theory" does apply and this thread is not one about engineering. Moving to skepticism and debunking.
Me/Noddy: Just WHICH experts are you refering to?

It took months for the "experts" to come up with the ...quote..."truss theory".

The look on the building designers face says it all in the interview conducted after the collapse.

Answer my questions Russ....Super Mentor.

You cannot.

You and the rest of your ilk are the "specialized" idiot class who would believe Noddy and Big Ears flew into those towers because a government "expert" told you so.

I've finished playing with you.

Twas fun.
They managed to avoid answering a SINGLE one of my REASONABLE doubts on their version of events.

That proves Da Nile is DEFINATELY MORE than a river in Egypt.

It's better to just live by ..."those that have ears will listen".

Perhaps it's a new "evoloutionary" thing whereby individuals able to penetrate the cloud of lies and deciet will better able to survive and reproduce in the coming years.

Slowly the Earth will be replaced by a new species of "free thinking" humanoids.

We can only hope.

Bet they've taken the thread down now!

07-14-2005 11:04 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Just read it , Damn, I was hoping to get someone I know through connections to get on there, perhaps they could start it over again, possibly get on the main post of Dr Michio Kaku ?

igwt 07-15-2005 12:06 AM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
They are living in denial at the physics forum lol

Max 07-15-2005 03:52 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Looked like fun TB- this should be done more here. :-P

I don't think that these guys are NSA or in denial, you just have to understand what we're up against. By some of the research that I've gathered there are millions who are against freedom and truth. Many seem to try and live a normal life but will fire with both guns when someone talks about government corruption, suppressed sciences and the like. This exercise was a good example. There are some clues that can be picked up on to better gauge who is in denial and who is working under corrupt terms. Those who posted on the physic forum and tried to justify WTC7 seem highly likely to be shills- it's utterly absurd to think that WTC7 was anything other than a textbook demolition. Those who attack with such vigor against it expose themselves for what they are.

I do feel sorry for them- many of them are trapped in their reality with no where to go but I of course disagree with their activity to suppress the truth.

truebeliever 07-15-2005 07:33 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
Good points MAX.

I wonder about "paid schills".

I think there are PLENTY in such complete "Da Nile" that they're unnescesary.


One thing that did come to me while biting my tounge over there, is that for such a RAGING INFERNO,enough to weaken the "core" symmetrically in 7...why did'nt we see a fireball when 22,000 gallons of deisel cooked off?

We hear the term "fires were fed by deisel"...fed nicely it seems. It would seem logical that the fires would make their way back to the source and heat the 22,000 gallon container to such a point as to cause the "low" volatility deisel to explode, rather nicely.

Just something worth mentioning.

Max 07-15-2005 08:06 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
WTC 7 is the most obvious piece of the NWO that is so in-your-face -- it's what made me see the ways of the right side.

This is my favorite piece on WTC7- a mark-up of the FEMA report:

They conclude:

So we have been presented with the following absurd story:

1. Power to the Twin Towers was wired from the substation in WTC 7 through two separate systems. The first provided power throughout each building; the second provided power only to the emergency systems. In the event of fire, power would only be provided to the emergency systems. This was to prevent arcing electric lines igniting new fires and to reduce the risk of firefighters being electrocuted. There were also six 1,200 kW emergency power generators located in the sixth basement (B-6) level of the towers, which provided a backup power supply. These also had normal and emergency subsystems.
2. Previous to the collapse of the South Tower, the power to the towers was switched to the emergency subsystem to provide power for communications equipment, elevators, emergency lighting in corridors and stairwells, and fire pumps and safety for firefighters. At this time power was still provided by the WTC 7 substation.
3. Con Ed reported that "the feeders supplying power to WTC 7 were de-energized at 9:59 a.m.". This was due to the South Tower collapse which occurred at the same time.
4. Unfortunately, even though the main power system for the towers was switched off and WTC 7 had been evacuated, a design flaw allowed generators (designed to supply backup power for the WTC complex) to start up and resume an unnecessary and unwanted power supply.
5. Unfortunately, debris from the collapse of the north tower (the closest tower) fell across the building known as World Trade Center Six, and then across Vesey Street, and then impacted WTC 7 which is (at closest) 355 feet away from the north tower.
6. Unfortunately, some of this debris penetrated the outer wall of WTC 7, smashed half way through the building, demolishing a concrete masonry wall (in the north half of the building) and then breached a fuel oil pipe that ran across the building just to the north of the masonry wall.
7. Unfortunately, though most of the falling debris was cold, it manages to start numerous fires in WTC 7.
8. Unfortunately, even with the outbreak of numerous fires in the building, no decision was made to turn off the generators now supplying electricity to WTC 7. Fortunately, for the firefighters, someone did make the decision not to fight and contain the fires while they were still small, but to wait until the fires were large and out of control. Otherwise, many firefighters may have been electrocuted while fighting the fires.
9. Unfortunately, the safety mechanism that should have shut down the fuel oil pumps (which were powered by electricity) upon the breaching of the fuel line, failed to work and fuel oil (diesel) was pumped from the Salomon Smith Barney tanks on the ground floor onto the 5th floor where it ignited. The pumps eventually emptied the tanks, pumping some 12,000 gallons in all.
10. Unfortunately, the sprinkler system of WTC 7 malfunctioned and did not extinguish the fires.
11. Unfortunately, the burning diesel heated trusses one and two to the point that they lost their structural integrity.
12. Unfortunately, this then (somehow) caused the whole building to collapse, even though before September 11, no steel framed skyscraper had ever collapsed due to fire.

You must agree, it is absurd, isn't it?

truebeliever 07-15-2005 09:19 PM

Re: Physics Forum against free speech
With that "tank" nicely empty, we should have seen a "spontaneous" explosion like TWA 800!

Ha ha ha.

Like clubbing baby fur seals. It's too easy. We should write a letter of complaint to "Scam Central" offering our services as covert op planners and script writers.

I reckon they've got the guy who used to write for the old Batman series writing the plots.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:49 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.