Mythbusters not testing 9/11 Myths.
One of the greatest and most important myths in our society today, that really needs an answer is wether it’s possible for a steel frame building (like the world trade center) to collapse without using explosions to undermine the structure.
I love the Mythbusters show and I thought this is exactly what they need to test. I was about to write it as a suggestion on discovery.com/mythbusters but a post at http://community.discovery.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/9741919888/m/7401915729 told me
“Please refrain from posting any show ideas that are 9/11 related. These are inappropriate because they are emotionally charged and cause discord among the members of the board.”
Yes they are emotionally charged, that’s exactly why they need to be busted or confirmed. To my knowledge noone has yet built a scale model of a steel frame building to see what really happens with just the structural damage that the planes caused. I think the Mythbusters would have the skills needed to test this thing.
Keeping a lid on it because it can be sensitive to some people is just not good science. Considering the other stuff they do on that show which can at times be very graphic, building a steel bulding and poking holes in it can hardly upset anyone. I think the people who lost loved ones in the tragedy have the right to test the demolition myth. In the airplane episode they crashed planes. There have been quite a few airplane crashes the last 10 years, and they did not refrain from trying those myths because they “cause discord” among members of the board.
… I’ve always thought that truth and openness is more healing than sweeping things under the carpet, no matter that the results would be of the myth, it would at least have been independently tested. If a myth exists, that is current, important and not thoroughly examined, why not test it?
This image taken at the WTC site shows a core column sliced diagonally that has melted the column. This is exactly the way controlled demolition experts cut columns to take down buildings…
However, as pointed out, columns were cut during the cleanup and I have no source of this photo.
For recent press release and video regarding the investigation into 9/11, and especially the attack on pentagon please turn here: http://mrgnome.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/pentagon-911-attack-flight-path-discrepancies/
I do find it provocative that the reason they give for not investigating the towers is emotional sensitivity. This could be true of a lot of myths–for some. The particular emotions inherent in 9/11 affect many, many people, which give us many, many reasons to want to know the truth!
Muse, thank you for your comment. I truly agree with your logic.
i know that there are 100 questions that most people dont even know about, that are not answered.
Why did BUSH/Cheny try so hard to stop the investigation ?
As far as the MYTHS, i have debunked SNOPES here
. Response to snopes pentagon “rumor” urban legend 9/11
I totally agree that this should be busted on the Mythbusters. You think its an emotionally charged subject now, you just wait till we find out what happens when 400 tons of aluminum flying at approximately 700 feet per second collides into a 500,000 ton building made of steel and reinforced concrete. Should be interesting to see that Mythbusted.
Mike,
You hit the nail on the head. The numbers just don’t add up. A (relatively) small aircraft (I don’t think people understand how fragile these things are) against a colossal steel structure don’t make it implodeon itself and fall down.
I my opinion, for it to come down like that, the structural supports have to have been blown with controlled demolitions. I don’t care about the conspiracy theories here, who planted the bombs is a later question. It was demolished by explosives, simple physical fact. The more i look at the evidence the more certain I get.
actually, theres a LOT more to it than the buildings collapse.
Most people just look at the photos and see a “Conspiracy theory” and think we are nuts, but they dont spend the time to really read.
Think of the Anthrax attacks ?
The Anthrax letters were sent BEFORE 9/11 which means those attacks are related to 9/11 (or its a REALLY BIG coincidence), and im tired of coincidences and 9/11…
Battelle, as a CIA contractor, partnered with Bioport for America’s sole anthrax vaccine production. Bioport-largely owned by Britain’s top secret biowarfare consortium PortonDown, bin Laden family associate Faud El Hibri, Admiral William J. Crowe, Jr., a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and others (including, according to some investigators, the multinational investment firm and defense contractor, the Carlyle Management Group, that managed bin Laden family millions prior to 9-11, directed by past CIA director Frank Carlucci, James Baker III (->), and Past President George H.W. Bush);
The Anthrax was never linked to ANY arabs, but came from US military bases…
This is for all of you idiots on here who have your facts wrong but keep perpetuating them as truth!…mrgnome-Your opinion does not matter! It could be my opinion that there are 13 inches in a foot but it does not make it so..what matters are facts, something which you seem to have few of.The core column in the photo was not cut by explosives…it was cut after 9/11 by men with torches to clear the debris, there is video of this being done! Mike- 400 tons? So you have now turned a 767 from a plane with a max take off weight of 400,000 lbs into weighing 800,000 lbs!Brad- The Anthrax attacks started on September 18 ,2001, 7 days after 9/11, not before 9/11!
Leo, thank you for your input, but please mind your language, there is no reason for calling people idiots here. Can you provide a link to the video of that column being cut if it’s posted somewhere? Regarding the photo:
“In this photo, for example, the column directly above the fireman’s helmet shows that it was cut with thermite. There is a substantial amount of hardened molten iron which can be seen on both the inside and outside of the box column. This is precisely what one would expect to find on a column which had been cut with thermite.
Experts who have viewed this photograph say that this column was not cut with a torch.”
http://www.rense.com/general70/pphe.htm
I truly agree that facts matter, but opinions do matter too and everyone is entitled to their opinions. Just like you are. You are welcome to comment again, but please try to use a more respectful tone, otherwise your opinion will be stigmatized by the way it is put forward.
mrgnome,
This country is in so much trouble. The fact that there is a vocal group in American that do not believe we should even be questioning the facts of 9/11 is totally disturbing. I too was just perusing the Mythbusters site today, hoping they had done some work on 9/11 myths, and I too discovered that they have not only not done a show on these theories, but that they will not even allow discussion of them in their forum!!! They think these discussions are ‘inappropriate’, because they are ‘emotionally charged’? There has never been a more important ‘myth’ than 9/11, in reading that message today, I have lost a lot of respect for them as scientists, and as citizens of this country. These are people who have the skills and forum to make a real statement about 9/11, be it myth or reality, and they are too afraid to go anywhere near it. I can only assume that they know without a shadow of doubt that an aluminum plane could not bring down a skyscraper.. and they know they would be in the middle of a serious fire storm if they spoke out about that. Who owns the Discovery channel? Is it yet another media organization owned by a company that is profiting off this war?
Just my curiousity on the subject, but does anyone have any INFORMAITION on that picture that is shown in this thread, the one that showes an obviously cut collum? Some people will say that the pix was done after the clean-up opperation and so the collum was cut after the so-called collapse and that then disscredits the Controlled Demolition theory.
But knowing who took the pix and when would settle the issue. Any help here?
Charlie, exactly. I’d love to know too!
So i think that mythbusters NEED to do this myth. Millions of americans are asking them to, and they always say to send in our ideas at the end of their show. If they can do the moon landing conspiracy and test plane crashes…then why not 9/11? Maybe it’s because the government really does control ALL of the media.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-Gby9dbeIU
That video says ALOT!!
Someone who is demanding the truth,
DJ
America is waiting for Mythbusters to debunk the 9/11 conspiracy theories. From young to old we would like to dismiss a good portion of the theories. I understand there is curriculum being developed on the physics of 9/11 that should be available soon in a layman’s form. Until 9/11 for dummies is written we would like a show from our favorite Mythbusters to satisfy our curiosity. After that might I suggest you find the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
I am a confirmed member of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I have a UCLA mechanical engineering degree. There is no need for Mythbusters. Physics is physics. The buildings were demolished -period.
John, thank you for your comment. I believe you on the physics part. Perhaps this is why they are not testing it on prime time television. Are they afraid of showing what would acttually happen? However, locking the issue out totally from the discovery forum and not testing it is just unscientific I.M.O. Why not test some of the most important myths right now? Who/what is Discovery channel afraid of? How about some scientific transparency and reasoning, wherever that leads us It’s better than the situation we have now.
Again thank you for your comment John.
Please give me a break with saying that the column was cut with a torch after 911. What an ignorant and obviously false thing to say. I have seen the photos of workers cutting some of the columns. Scientific fact has it that those torches are incapable of producing that slag seen on the cut column. Also, simply look at the area surrounding the column and common sense tells you no professional is stupid enough to head into that unstable rubble with thermic lances and oxyacetylene torches blazin. This is a very small part of all the research proving 911 was an inside job. DO what any good investigator or detective does with ALL complicated crimes, RESEARCH THE MONEY TRAIL. Arabs in a cave? Laughable.
I am a simple danish guy that ‘from the word go’ was sceptical.
It looked like freakin´ Hollywood produced movie trailer,
and my common sense has always told me that the nearly perfect free fall scenario could not have occured without the use of CD. I am not about to give Sir Isaac Newton the finger on his brilliant and (for the time) groundbreaking laws of physics.
Apparently (and sadly too) a few too many people in the World are; a fact that is really difficult for me to get my head around.
But then again high IQ is not abundant in the World.
I believe that there is a correlation between the ability to see through and the intellect one is equipped with.
I didn´t step on anyones toes with that statement in this forum I´m sure.
A relevant qoute it seems:
‘You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.’ – Abraham Lincoln
Jacob. I agree with the intuition thing. Whether to call it intelligence or not is another interesting discussion. I think it also depends on what your frame of mind is, your frame of reference. Interesting stuff this. Right up my alley as a cognitive scientist
mrgnome.
High IQ —> wide frame of reference.
Low IQ —> narrow frame of reference.
The only reason (as far as I am able to see) for people with
intellects well above average to buy in on the idea of three highrises (it never happened prior to 911) collapsing the very same day due to the effects of fire alone, is to be found in its root of fear; fear of an overwhelming and unpleasant truth.
The issue has been debated on danish high IQ fora and I have been flabbergasted more than once by the abscence of reason and common sense in some of these ‘exchanges of opinions’.
Btw., the two puppets in ‘mythbusters’ don´t have a say, when it comes to the selection of the topics suitable for scrutiny and public view. The puppet masters do.
I´d say ‘mythbusters’ are soooo busted!
We don´t need them anyway:
911 massive inside Job. Case closed — THEY FOUND THERMITE GUYS!! it was in the dust! they tested it , and the world trade centers were blow up! mythbusters cannot bust this myth, becuase the buildings were blown up. I think they probably all know that on the show. That is why they will not touch it.
Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth part 9 10:36: ‘It’s tearing itself apart at free fall speed’. This statement speaks volumes for those who are fearless and not least able to listen.
What heavy duty physic structures acts that way on planet Earth other than three buildings on the very same day?
Only in cartoons can a thing like this happen without the
aid of something extra.
The masses were witnessing a farce,
and they still don’t realize that it infact was and is exactly that.
The argumentation ‘Blueprint for Truth part 11 3:00′ is so very
very very solid too, unless you (as I earlier stated) feel that
Sir Newton was way off track with His eyeopening (only for some as it seems) studies and fruit of those.
I’m right up your alley Jake; and on the same frequency too c”,)
What a bunch of nutjobs. Get a LIFE already! I’ve got news for you: the moon landings weren’t fake, FDR didn’t know about Pearl Harbor, and Elvis was not a space alien! 9/11 was an act of terrorism. Sheesh. Please do not vote or reproduce, morons!
Bryan, with comments that childish you only appear as a “moron” yourself, to use your own words. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even you. Some of us base it on some kind of sciencentific thinking and reflection… I’m going to let this slide past moderation simply because it is such a perfect example of what Jacob talks about in comment 19.
To the rest of you in this thread, thank you for interesting comments and keeping it civilized.
If you only limit your research into 9/11 by only listening to people like Gage and going to sites that reaffirm your suspicions of course you’re going to continue believing whatever you want to believe. I challenge anyone who truly believes the government committed this crime to head over to sites such as screwloosechange.com and the 9/11 conspiracy theory board at JREF (http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=64) and actually give the same amount of time to reading the evidence there that you gave to reading theories that made you believe it was the government who orchestrated the destruction of WTC. If you’ve watched Loose Change in its entirety, I challenge you to also watch the Screw Loose Change video in its entirety. http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/
Oh, and that picture of the “explosive cut” column is only one of many similar columns at the site. Here’s the video of the workers cutting the columns http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySHgiUxnLC0
As for Mythbusters not touching it with a ten foot pole. In my experience, people who truly want to believe what they want will continue to believe it regardless of fact. I have a feeling the producers know this and fear the backlash regardless of what Mythbusters finds. I personally think this would increase their viewership, but tv people tend not to like taking risks.
Bryan it’s a long shot to try and stop intelligent people from questioning your ‘reality’ simply by calling them morons.
On top of that you throw some of your ‘truths’ (unrelated to the issue at hand btw.) in the arena without producing any tangible
arguments to support any of them.
Please be more specific next time already!
P.s. You’re so right though; 9/11 was infact an act of terrorism.
The question here is, who you believe the terrorists are.
In that specific regard your views and mine are obviously somewhat different to put it mildly.
mrgnome c”,)
NJC
Thank you for your civilized comment, I too believe we must maintain an open mind, in both ways. Good information on the column-cutting. My opinion is still that explosives must have been used for the buildings to fall like that, and I do have lots of engineers and architects that back my most intuitive statement up. But I really appreciate a good discussion.
Have you guys seen “Blueprint for truth”? What do you think about what is stated in that lecture. So far I think that is the most scientifically correct approach.
mrgnome, I’ve seen “Blueprint for Truth” (in it’s full length of course).
I couldn’t agree with you more; this manifest has a ‘to the bone’ scientiffic approach.
Today’s words for those who don’t habla common sense:
Free fall speed c”,)
Hehe, exactly!
Everytime they debunk the conspiracy theories you guys just ignore it anyway. Popular Mechanics already debunked all the conspiracy theories regarding 911. You people are insane. As the guys on Mythbusters said on CNN…you would have to have way too many people able to keep it a secret for too long to pull it off.
Ted, first of all thank you for commenting. I tried to search the PM article for how they answered the free fall collapse speed question, but I didn’t find anything? I haven’t seen anyone able to explain that with normal physics.
If the physical facts tell you one thing, and the other fact against that is psychological (ie how could they keep quiet), at least in my mind the physical fact weighs heavier. If only a few at the very top knew and planned to stand down and let it happen there is a possibility they could have kept quiet.
But for the buildings to fall like that without explosives the law of gravity and mass resistance must have been changed on that day and the chance for nature laws to change is much smaller than the possibility that they could have kept quiet.
There are just so many things that went wrong that day, so the odds of all that happening including bending laws of nature by pure chance is just non-existing. I’d really like to hear from the air traffic controllers working that day. They made a tape recording their stories on what happened that day, but unfortunately it was destroyed by an FAA official (NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/06/national/06CND-TAPE.html?_r=1&hp)
Start with what we know, look at the physical evidence and go from there. Then check the original hypothesis. Does it explain the outcome? If not, the original hypothesis has to change and then you go through the same procedure again and again until you find a hypothesis that can explain the outcome. That is the scientific method, and that is what needs to be used here, not the emotional method based on “I cannot believe someone would do this”
That is the way I reason anyway, do you think that’s insane?
Ted, that’s a load of nonsense.
Even if a thousand people knew about ‘the real deal’,
it wouldn’t produce any threat to a cover up.
Someone would believe a guy, with inside knowledge
that decides to go public, but way way way far from everybody.
There are six billion plus inhabitants on the planet, mind you.
People like myself are by far outnumbered by people like you living in denial.
What a vague argument (in light of the above facts) this is: ‘you would have to have way too many people able to keep it a secret for too long to pull it off.’
I would loooooooooove to read the attempt to debunk by ‘Popular Mechanics’…
Throw a link in the arena please? c”,)
So very relevant again. Thanx Abe:
‘You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.’ – Abraham Lincoln
Btw. I don’t mind being called insane. Such finger pointing statements tells a lot about the capability of perception of the sender and not two shits about the reciever.
Basics: Whenever you’re pointing your finger at others,
three fingers are pointing back at you.
Try it if you don’t believe me…
mrgnome is writing the same minut as I.
Ain’t that funny. -LOL- (“,)
Almost that is…
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
And you can find Dr- David Ray Griffins responses to this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbY5_qtz83M
Let’s get physical.
mrgnome – interesting, troublesome and scary story in NY Times.
Yet another ‘Why?’ it describes…
30 seconds in and there is already a bad tabloid stench to PM’s article:
‘Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase “World Trade Center conspiracy” and you’ll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.’
We don’t reject in particular that hijackers associated with who
the f… ever where involved!!!
We reject that cartoon laws of physics suddenly rule three
times the very same day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What ‘Official consensus’ are they talking about?
For heavens sake – I don’t think I have the patience to read
the entire article…
I’m moving on to Dr- David Ray Griffin instead.
I really felt mashed. Saved by the bell.
Cheers…
Ten minutes in and Dr- David Ray Griffin is my man c”,).
It’s truth time…
Dr- David Ray Griffin really tore the whole fat lie apart.
I laughed and nodded in agreement for almost two hours.
Cheers again mrgnome c”,)
Since when do “high-power explosives” cause steel to “melt?” High-explosives would have shattered the column, leaving very distinctive signs.
Tell me, how do you know that column wasn’t cut by ironworkers during the cleanup and recovery efforts? We know for a fact that columns were cut in this way, while the invocation of “high-power explosives” is highly speculative and faces a number of logical challenges, such as the difficulty of somehow gaining access to structural columns deep inside an active office building and covertly planting explosives, the demonstrable fact that the towers collapsed from the impact sites down (while the point where this column is cut would have been from the first few stories while the building was standing) etc. At a minimum, for you to draw any conclusions from this picture, you would need to know when it was taken. Do you?
Evan, I beg you to read up a bit further on all the evidence for column destruction at a lower point, ie basement. And yes it does raise some uncomfortable questions but so does this whole thing.
You might want to read this:http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060118104223192
And here’s some math: http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=7924
However, I agree with your thoughts regarding this specific picture. It is a very uncertain statement, and the melted steel here could more likely come from thermite being used. I know this picture has been used on several occations though, and I know the columns were cut post-collapse.
As I said above I’d love to hear from anyone having more info on this particular picture.
Anyway, Evan, thank you for reading and thank you for commenting.
For those who still have their eyes wide shut:
Debunk this!
I found this to be informative in a very scientific fashion too!
Just sharing and hoping that more will listen/get the wax out
of their ears:
I’m just an average guy from Denmark, who actually saw hope and change in the prospect of a strong afro-american man as President
of the united States of America.
However, when push came to shove, he turned out to be nothing
other than a simple puppet.
Wake up and smell the coffee boys and girls alike:
Yet another overt example of cover up by The Discovery Channel:
Fact is they refuse to test the 9/11 myth and we all should ask WHY? It is all science, and testing the myth wouldnt hurt the people that lost their beloved ones one that day. It would tell them the truth. But truth is not interesting for mythbusters I guess. They know it was a controlled demolition, and showing people that the 9/11 was clearly a inside job, would cause chaos in USA and the rest of the world of course.
Human,
I couldn’t agree more.
Just thought I’d share:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-594683847743189197#