A question for CT no-planers

If no planes impacted the WTC, what exactly caused the immense fireballs at the time of supposedly faked impact?

A central argument you have is that no one really saw the planes. But when making that argument you often cite that people only saw the fireball but not the plane. In order to tidy up the no plane theory you will need to explain how the fire balls originated if not from jet fuel.

and randomly accuse people who saw the planes hit for being "bribed by Bushco!!!!!"

who's dad died in the WTC, would probably beat the F out of them.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The fireballs have all the characteristics of the Special F/X used to create giant explosions for many actions movies.

* there is a big orange flash
* there is a rapidly expanding 'fireball'
* there is heavy black smoke, but very little scorching
* little structural damage to the 'affected' area
* there is relatively little fire left behind once the 'fireball' has dissipated

(Armagedon 1998)


(9/11 2001)

I'm kind of partial to this little screenie from that flick.



Things that make you go, HMMMMM.

The no-planers tell us people on the ground saw the fire balls, but did not see the plane. So with this established fact, how were the fire balls generated without a plane load of fuel?

Interesting huh!

Nice close of that South Tower meotorite from Armagedon hit..... by the way Perp.....

Here are some more for comparison purposes:

Or do you just get a kick out of these pics?

Like this CGI flight 93 from the Flight That Fought Back DVD(2005)

was supposed to be holding in his right hand???

North Tower antenna, since it's gone.

But it looks more like a big techno phallus he's crushing in all his savage power.

Wow, you mean they could fake a plane impacting the WTC on video and fake a fireball at the WTC in front of eyewitness'? Like Disney?

You have clearly stated the fire ball was seen by eyewitnesses.

How did they do it?

Here is a diesel fuel explosion:


Here is the south Tower:

diesel fuel is explosive. I will look for a link to back this up. it is supposed to be one of the advantages of a diesel engine, that it might catch fire, but not explosively like gasoline.

BTW, the photo posted by seatnineb that's supposed to represent a diesel explosion is from a children/teacher website......AND it's not shown or labeled as a diesel explosion. It's being used as a generic picture of fire in a section on engines/combustion.....diesel engines are used as an example but the photo is NOT intended/labeled as a representation of a diesel explosion.

more truthiness from the truthers



more graphics from that site

http://www.ftexploring.com/energy/energy-1.htm

Class B Type Fire
Diesel Pit Fire
Louisiana State University ~ Fire Training Academy
300 gallons extinguished in 51 seconds, one man, one hose



www.summitenvironmental.com/photo_flameout.htm

:crazy:


You should sell your ideas to the aviation industry. They didn't know diesel fuel was as volatile as Jet-A....they could save a bundle of money on fuel expense!

I learn so much on this forum.

Steel is combustible.

Chicken-wire bunny cages are valid models for high-rise structures

and now.....diesel is as volatile as jet-A...because somebody posted a still photo of a burning diesel pit.

A grain storage facility explosion was a key part of the movie's storyline. They used a mixture of diesel fuel and gasoline to create the fire. The movie crew was on this set for a week and had to re-light the fire many times to get the footage they wanted.
http://www.fortwashingtonfc.org/Archive_OtherActivities.htm

Read it.........read it again.......come on, you can do it........come on, almost got it....No?


Let me help you...

"They used a mixture of diesel fuel and gasoline "


Not that I think you care about any facts but mixing diesel and gasoline is a no-no. It makes a dangerous combination of diesel's flammability and gasoline's volatility.....

But wait.....I bet you now have a new theory that gas WAS mixed with diesel in those tanks???? Come on, let's hear it.

I know this because I have worked in the construction/building industry around diesel equipment AND I'm a pilot (private 20+ years).

But for the sake of proof, links and all that:

http://www.dieselpage.com/art0100gd.htm
Mixing Gasoline with Diesel Fuel
At one time information was released suggesting that a small amount of gasoline mixed with diesel fuel for use in cold weather was an acceptable practice. This information was eventually retracted due to conditions that may result from such a mixture.

First and foremost is a safety factor. The gasoline fumes from gasoline are very rich and there is not enough oxygen available for a spark generated at the filler neck to ignite these fumes. The diesel fumes are too lean and will not ignite. A mixture in the right proportion could create fumes volatile enough to ignite from a spark generated at the filler neck

Considering the plane supposedly hit 4 floors below these diesel fuel tank generators on the 88th floors....



Maybe that diesel did ignite after all.

Try harder.

Now we are talking about a lady and her purse being burned??????

We are no longer discussing the huge jet-a fire-ball billowing out of the building????

Let me know and we can discuss her.....otherwise I'll assume you are just changing the subject because you ran out of gas (pun intended).

I give you evidence of people being burnt on the same floors as those diesel fuel tanks......4 floors higher than where the plane hit the building.

Care to give an explanation?

Or maybe it's you that has run out of gas...not that you had any to start off with.

....as to how the, so called, diesel fire-ball was made.

Your "make it up as you go" ad-lib conspiratheorising grows tiresome on this thread.

Again, from the OP of this thread: If no planes impacted the WTC, what exactly caused the immense fireballs at the time of supposedly faked impact?

....where it's diesel fuel tanks are located.

Gee.... some coincidence huh......

Sid

Edit: and yet another truther can't figure out that hotlinking images is stealing someone else's bandwidth.

....built on the upper floors of the WTC.

Considering that a plane hitting the WTC was factored into it's construction equation ....I find it a bit strange that they would risk putting diesel fuel tanks on one of the higher floors.....where "a plane lost in fog" would be more likely to hit.

the other is explosive (picture b is an explosive fire from jet fuel)


diesel fuel burns, otherwise it wouldnt be much of a fuel. it just doesnt explode.

Night fire. Dynamite is strapped to a drum of diesel fuel. When a bullet slams into the charge of dynamite, the dynamite detonates, atomizing and igniting the fuel in the classic Hollywood tradition.
http://www.knobcreekshoot.com/images/main/Gallery1-11.h...

that is diesel being exploded?

if it is for hollywood chances are it is something else to make a nice explosion.

Diesel fuel and dynamite:


Diesel fuel and gasoline:

>>>>>In addition, the low volatility of diesel fuel offers significant safety advantages in military operations. Diesel powered vehicles are less to explode during accidents and combat, helping to protect the lives of soldiers.<<<<<<<<<<,,,

http://www.dieselforum.org/where-is-diesel/public-safetyhomeland-security/




Another not well thought out argument/justification by the 'truthers' to justify their kooky pet theories.

Almost not worth the effort to google it for them.......but there you have it.

....boy does it look evil:


Night fire. Dynamite is strapped to a drum of diesel fuel. When a bullet slams into the charge of dynamite, the dynamite detonates, atomizing and igniting the fuel in the classic Hollywood tradition.
http://www.knobcreekshoot.com/images/main/Gallery1-11.html

It's a nice visual to ask this question.

The multiple fire balls exiting the WTC are at least 250 to 300 feet in diameter. The picture you posted looks to be maybe 25 feet in diameter at most. A quick calculation indicates the volume of fuel need for the towers fire ball was at least 500 times that of the drum of diesel in your picture.

Of course this is a very rough estimate of the amount of fuel needed to make a fire ball the size seen at the WTC, but there is a least order of magnitude difference you need to explain.

...of the south tower:





So it is difficult to speculate how much diesel would have been needed.....

Plus we need to know exactly how much diesel was stored on this 88th floor.

Those are words I thought I'd never see you write.

Actually you don't even know if there was diesel stored on the 88th floor. The article you posted said they installed generators on the floor. That does not mean the fuel tanks were located next to them.

....the 88th floor....

In fact maybe you are right LARED...

Who is to say they were not installed on the mechanical floor underneath the 78th floor skylobby......exactly where the plane hit the building.....coincidence huh?

There may have been diesel fuels tanks if unknown size and location in the WTC.

The diesel fuel if used to create the explosion would need some type of explosive device atomizing the fuel to create a fireball.

Based on a very rough estimate it would take a significant amount of diesel fuel to create a fireball the sizes seen.

Also to make the fairy tale of no plane maintain the illusion, the blasts would need to be timed with the technology that created the faked planes. The blast would also have to be placed in strategic locations creating a plane shape in the side of the buildings where the 'impacts' occurred.

The many plane parts found in the WTC would been planted shortly after the fake planes impacted. Even the fuselage found on the roof of a nearby building was planted.

One other issue is the jet engine noise that many people hear and testified to hearing, was somehow faked and perfectly timed with the fake impacts.

Did I miss anything?

Even going by the official story parameters...and as far as I am aware....FEMA and the NIST failed to mention or make any reference to these diesel fuel tanks .If they have made a reference to diesel fuel tanks being stored in the twin Towers then please link that reference to me.
Considering that these diesel tanks seem to have been located in roughly if not the same location where the plane hit the building I find that more than a coincidence.And regardless of whether you believe the official story or any alternative story I think these diesel tanks desereve some attention.

As for the rest of your question.....who knows?

So how was it done? The no-planners believe the fire balls were real, but not the planes.

The night before 9-11, John O'Neill and Jerry Hauer had dinner with a scenic designer named Fred Gallo, who runs a business that does special effects, he has a background in architecture and engineering. He worked on Terminator 2 at Universal Studios (check out the fireballs in the video)

http://themeparks.universalstudios.com/hollywood/website/attr_t3.html

Jerry Hauer is the guy who found O'Neill his job at the WTC right before 9-11, is associated with Stephen Hatfill, the anthrax suspect, , as well as being a bio-terrorism "expert", and terrorism "expert" (ask yourself how do these terrorism "experts" get their information? and was head of the Office of Emergency Management)
I know O'Neill was a "man about town" type, but it's an interesting threesome, and look at any Hollywood movie for a fireball, they look the same as the ones in the Trade Center. Could have been special effects.

Story about O'Neill, Hauer, and the scenic designers:
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/12/victim.wtc.security/

web site for Fred gallo:
http://www.prg.com/people/fgallo

The dish on LIHOP candidate Hauer:
http://www.911review.org/Sept11Wiki/Hauer,Jerome.shtml

People who were in downtown Manhattan that day who are now no-planers?

I don't understand why this is important to you

to you and your no plane theories.

so please explain the fireball, how it was caused if there were no planes?

It was detonated by high power expolsives. Or do you consider that humanly impossible?

manage to load it up with dynamite with no one noticing?

Scott Forbes says:

It must have been 4-6 weeks before 9/11..it was like rebuilding work going on upstairs....the tenants..the people from Aeon who had been there were moved somewhere else
The offices were just vacant..there was alot of heavy machinery building going on the floor above..it was almost like pneumatic drills and lots of hammering..so much so that the floors were shaking..that is how noticable it was..it was almost like something heavy was being moved and then taken off wheels and it was like boom..our floor liteally shook ..you could feel the weight above you

On one occasion I opened the door to see what was going on being nosy..when I opened the door..the whole office space was empty..there was nothing there at all...it was quite bizarre.... because it was just empty..nothing ,barren, zero..not even cables hanging from the ceiling...but there had been these heavy noises and vibrations from the floors above..it was really strange.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=9%2F11+mysteries

In combination with diesel fuel...I would believe they would.

Enough to create multiple fire balls 250 to 300 feet in diameter?

I've read and looked at the available information on 9-11 and I've concluded that the mainstream media & various government agencies are lying based on blatant contradictions and physical unlikelihoods. Recently, a lot of footage has become available from that day and I believe that the plane footage is faked. A lot of the footage after that day had time to look a little more convincing, but the "plane" here was supposedly "live" at about 5:00. This is ABC (Did Disney own them yet?). If you think that is a real plane, that was supposedly in a rapid descent from New Jersey from 28,000 to the wtc in 5 minutes, then what can I say? Fireballs can be achieved in a number of ways.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMucVeew8eg&mode=related&search=

Why is there a fireball coming out from the other side of the building after the "plane" goes "in"? What the hell sense does that make?

however, at 500 miles an hour at that level some have suspected missiles (dressed up as planes). If people need to know they have to find and talk to eyewitnesses. My neighbor was at the Marriot and luckily survived but he did hear planes but didn't see them. I don't buy the hologram theory unless someone doctored the videos and photos that have been shown by the media?