Ninetysixer• Show poetry

• Last seen on Oct 7 11:32 PM. Member since July 9, 2004.
• I'm a amethyst understanding poet for 22 comments.
• My mood is , and quote is ""Should be, isn't."".
• I am a 21 year old guy from South Carolina (United States)
• When I'm not writing, I'm A student.
• I have 22 comments, 12 poems

My Poetry

• Shoulders

  When we were lost you were strong,
  making sure that nothing was wrong.

  16 lines, 2 comments, September 16. In Death, Dedication, Family
• Of What We Are

  What allows us to sit and think of who we truly are,
  or what our eyes really see when we look upon a star?

  9 lines, 1 comment, September 11. In Thoughts, Life, Nature, Humanity, Knowledge, Understanding
• Hexagonal Word Seal

  Lock into this chamber round
  Demons that the hells hath found

  5 lines, 1 comment, November 16, 2008. In Weird, Abstract, My own style
• Awareness

  Forgive me for I will always look,
  even if the heavens shook.

  18 lines, 1 comment, March 25, 2008. In Other, Thoughts, Humanity

Guest Book

• ktbaby18 : hey! on October 7

  I like a lot of your quotes..they really speak the truth..also you have a lot of interests similar to mine
• Mystalix on October 27, 2007

  hi bro! get your butt on here more often!
• Ninetysixer on August 19, 2005

  I've been over this: The steel protection was blown away by plane debris, thus exposing the steel.
  You keep talking about how the laws of nature were compromised thus allowing the buildings to drop at unexplained rates.
  You can't give a definite answer to why.
  I can't give a definite answer to why the fuel melted the steel, but it did.
  I can't give an explanation to why the building designer made the building only able to stand up to a 707,but he did.
  I can't tell you why we are here, but we are.
  
  On a lighter note I do find it cool that the towers reacted the way they did, if of course you are telling the truth, and of course you were told the truth.
  
  Note on one of your misconceptions as I am writing this rebuttal I am looking at the crash site in Pennsylvania right after they found the plane, I see almost no plane (its in very small pieces, over a very large area), and NO GRASS IN THE PIT.
  I am looking at the defaced Pentagon, I see two very large wings (each in at lest 3 pieces) and a plane's tail end more pieces of the plane, and pieces of the outer walls dangling by steel wires.
  I am looking at the fire in the WTC I see red goo, and people falling.
  I am looking at you and I see a pessimist.
  I am looking at the fixed up Pentagon and I see a sign for the real 'Let's Roll!'.
  I am looking at pictures of a North Carolinian, Jim Gallucci, he works with the waste steel from Ground Zero, I see steel that is bent all over and some of the beams have rounded end indicating they were almost liquid a short while ago, note steel does not have to be liquid to blend break or to give way to too much weight so it didn't need to reach 1500c.
  I am looking at two pictures of Rudy Giuliani receiving his honorary Knighthood from Queen Elizabeth II.
  I see a picture of Manu Dhingra, who was burned over 40% of his body, he is wearing a black shirt.
  I see my main man Bush giving "The World We Have Entered" speech to the graduates of West Point, that year. He is doing that streasted syllable thing with his lips. Bush is as of right now taking his 5 week vacation, which is way too long.
  I am looking at white smoke rising from the WTC site 5 days after the attack.
  I am looking at the clean up phases of Ground Zero, and I am thinking of why the Terrorist attacked London and Spain as well.
  I am looking at the Skylight memorial, with all it's 88 searchlights pointed at Heaven, and I wonder how these pictures could be seen as anything except else as tragic and heroic.
• Temujin on August 16, 2005

  - pentagon/WTC: what i see is that you've ignored my point about the impossibility of a plane having hit the pentagon. not only this, but you are trying to suggest that the WTC was designed to withstand a 707 but NOT a 747 even though these were in production at the time, which means you are also suggesting that the engineers left no extra capacity. in any case, i'd like to know why YOU think the WTC collapsed, because you clearly enough state "molten steel" as a cause.
  
  - fuel: regarding your "personal favourite" (molten steel), could you PLEASE direct me to the video of this, because it is plainly impossible. let's do some basic science (very basic):
  
  steel melts at about 1500 degrees celsius. got that?
  jet fuel, which is essentially kerosine, burns at 800 degrees celsius, possibly a little over 900 degrees with the right proportion of oxygen, EXCEPT that we see black smoke coming from the buildings which indicates a relatively cool fire. it must also be remembered that large amounts of the jet fuel exploded outside of the building, the exterior columns were exposed to the air on three sides and naturally would dissolve heat at a fast rate, and the beams and columns were coated with fire proof materials. all of these things mean that the fire would never have been able to melt steel. so, "molten steel" pouring from the building looks to me like you don't know what you are looking at.
  
  - as for making your points, do you think that a 65,000 ton plane, disintegrated or not, makes much difference to a building the size of the WTC, which is specifically designed to withstand plane impacts? no, i don't think so, either.
  
  - freefall speeds:
  
  facts are very stubborn especially if you're dealing with science; to say that the next facts are false is to deny what science has proved, so enjoy the facts. this is very important, so read carefully.
  according to the law of falling bodies as put forward by galileo (1564 - 1642) and is still accepted today by all scientists as described in the world book encyclopedia:
  "The Law of Falling Bodies: The total distance travelled at the end of any specific time in a total vacuum"
  
  this is calculated by this formula:
  
  distance (D) = (32.16 divided by 2) x time in seconds squared;
  
  if there is any resistance then the speed of the falling body slows down, in relation to this resistance.
  
  in the case of the WTC north and south we know that the towers are 1350 feet tall. thus this equation follows:
  
  1350 = (32.16 / 2) x time in seconds squared.
  
  this works out to be 9.1627 seconds as the absolute fastest time these buildings could come down (this is without resistance! but as we know there is resistance, obviously).
  
  this presents some very interesting questions because the WTC south tower came down in (estimated) 10.4 seconds, and the WTC north tower came down in (estimated) 8.1 seconds.
  
  to add there was resistance, and plenty of it. the resistance was the massive lower sections of the buildings that were stabilized by over 250 major interior and exterior steel columns and thousands of steel trusses - so obviously plenty of resistance.
  
  now here is the major problem with the speed of collapse: it defies the laws of gravity! thus either:
  
  - the height of the buildings is inaccurate;
  - the time of the falls is inaccurate;
  - the scientific calculations used, which have been used over hundreds of years are inaccurate;
  - or something pulled down these buildings at a faster rate.
  
  time to start thinking logically - remember this is all science, no opinions, just facts.
  
  to believe the official bullshit about 9/11, you have to really want to - really REALLY want to.

Online: 1026

Moderators - add ticket
catz, Cyber Artist

526 visitors

Profanity Filter