Ali C

classic Rainbird

at least you can eat a chocolate fireguard, if tried to eat me I don't think it would taste so good.

don't read this

yeah, cool shots, thanks for uploading them!

very nice

definitely tilt the bars back! That will be the one best thing you can do with your bike to make them easier.

I repeat

Oh you in trouble!!

I ride because it's fun, always have done. I used to enjoy comps, now I enjoy street, I have never thought of it as expressing myself

yes Danny has changed trials, he's made dickheads easier to spot.

he just couldn't ride properly because he hurt his knee in Canada. the event was really cool! well done to Euan for winning £500!

Not sure if I "get" it. why call it a concept when it's a design? Unless it's a new type of t-shirt that you have invented? Why are some names in bold? I personally don't want a t-shirt with just a list of names on it, seems quite a lazy way of "designing" a shirt especially if you are just using quite common fonts.

looks awesome!

some pretty sweet riding, I have always liked his style! That place looks pretty sweet to ride too! my only "complaint" is that I like to hear background noises in videos so I can hear if people drag their brakes and stuff, but it's no biggie

that wasn't me, I don't have a key for the warehouse any more...I bet it was Jon!!

I am going to set it on fire

in all seriousness, not sure if I would do anything differently.

rode those red brick walls that everyone seems to ride (ever get kicked off there for having loud brakes?) went down past The Deep and rode some stuff over there but then we had to go as our parking ran out at 6.

good point! There are some pretty good caves in this country, I would buy a spear off Dave then find a decent cave.

I would move to Australia and live in the bush next to a creek and hunt things with a spear.

he looks pretty ragged in that picture

don't quote me saying that!! , I ain't "one of them" Oh yeah, conspiracy fans in "not telling every side of the story" shocker

It wasn't normal thermite that was found. It was some hi-tech military grade stuff. Tiny, un-reacted chips of it was found in alot of dust samples by many people. Did the military confirm this? Are you sure it's not just a case of if people look hard enough, they'll find what they want to find? Could such a crash with high temperatures and different materials crate something that looked similar? If I look hard enough I can find faeces pretty much everywhere, I am not saying this is the case but an idea perhaps? So explosives would have to be planted everywhere to guarantee a collapse but when a plane hits the top of it, a collapse is inevitable? Why couldn't they use momentum and less explosives as the collapse progressed? Just using the explosives to keep the collapse going and keep it straight. If it was me and I wanted to demolish the towers, I sure wouldn't rely on a small amount of explosives to do it. If I planted explosives and the building didn't collapse then you will get found out. If someone had asked me beforehand if a plane would destroy the buildings, I wouldn't have an answer. Now that I have seen the planes hit, I think its very possible. As I said before, the buildings were 95 percent air, the buildings weighed around 500,000 which is pretty light for it's day being one of the first buildings to be made out of fairly lightweight materials. I just don't see why it would be so hard for it to fall straight down? It was still heavy enough and had momentum (falling at around 200kph) to crush concrete below it. If it really had explosions helping it down, it would have fallen faster. If they pancaked, wouldn't we see a load of pancaked floors at the bottom? And it has been argued that pancaking floors would not take out the perimeter collumns or the core. Kinda the same points I made above, 95% air, blah, momentum, blah. The rubble left was still a quite a few stories high, not sure how you would expect to see floors in-tact but flatter after they just fell hundreds of meters with hundreds of tonnes of material falling on top of them. The one we see in the video could have been set off premiturely. Which could explain why it is the only one seen. But what it is and what got it too that temperature is the question. As planes are mostly aluminium, most of the exotic materials are in the engines, like some titanium, steel alloys. And the engines can take some pretty extreme temperature. I think with things like this, unless you were somehow in that room watching no-one will ever know for sure what it was, be it Thermite or other. Perhaps it's something really simple like liquid aluminium reacting and cooling with the air? Or perhaps it's something not so simple like a planted Thermite device planted by the government.....who knows? The burning pillars thing just seems like another case of the conspiracy folks again finding something if they look hard and long enough, just seems like some normal fires to me. And why aren't other tests being done. Why won't they do it if they have nothing to hide. Their aluminium theory was proven wrong so why haven't they done any other experiments for another theory? Since it is such a big mystery that could prove right or wrong whether it is thermite or not, I think it is pretty important. A lot of tests have been done by many people, either professional scientists or conspiracy nuts. I have seen people do tests that both explain why the building collapsed and very similar tests that say it is a cover-up. If you watch videos made by the conspiracy fans, they tend to skip over important info, or disregard it altogether, they tend to have selective hearing too, so a scientist could be explaining how it is possible for the buildings collapsed, but the conspiracy guys will only hear what they want to hear. Either way, I'll be taking any tests shown by the conspiracy guys with a pinch of salt. I want to see every side of the story by a completely neutral source point before I start to believe it was all planned. Ok. The theory is that they took out some difficult columns under the cover of the plane explosion. And the ones down in the basement were the toughest as they were the foundations and biggest weight supporters. The buildings collapsed into the basements, so core columns failed all the way down to the basement. Also don't forget that the basements and the ground floor lobbies took on serious damage, but the 80-90 floors between the ground floors and impact zone recieved none apart from the odd few. I just don't see how 500,000 of building travelling over 100mph couldn't destroy the basement. From what I have seen of the wreckage all floors looked pretty damaged to me, I think it would be pretty hard to predict exactly what floors would take what damage, all floors seemed pretty wrecked, but out of the hundreds of floors the building had, some are going to come off worse than others. I am just going by what even the 9/11 commision have said. They all agree that the jet fuel burnt off fast and became an ignition for desks, computers, carpets etc. About the steel, i found this which several sources say is pretty standard for structual steel... " Underwriters Laboratories (UL) certified the steel in the WTC towers to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours". I have also read that a British company made a replica of a floor of the towers and exposed it too a greater temperature than was possible and they didn't fail. How fast is fast? I am sure the steel could cope with 2000°F, but at the same time as being damaged by a plane and with thousands of tonnes of building pressing down on it? Unless you build a life-size model with the same conditions, you won't get the same results, building a single floor won't behave the same way as the floors that were hit by the plane did. I bet the conspiracy fan club love those tests and use them as proof, but to me it just isn't relevant. The south tower did start toplling sideways straight away, but It carried on going straight down which I find very unusual. It pretty much put a crease in the building. Once the structure started falling on one side, the building shape was compromised buckling supports in other floors. I just personally can't imagine the building not fall like it did, it just wouldn't make sense to me. I don't think people will design something to withstand a plane inpact and not take into account fire from jet fuel to follow. That seems abit silly. Without anything like this ever happening before, you can only go with either what computer programmes tell you or what you have learned about materials. Lets face it, the best they could do was make an educated guess as to what would happen if a plane hit the buildings. Seems they were pretty close but it was just an unfortunate series of events which caused an epic amount of damage. Trees fall sideways because they are top heavy and are not 95% air. Also if that picture really is a person in the hole (is it from a video?) I don't see any flames at that particular point, assuming where that person was standing was at that temperature seems to be jumping the gun a little, without talking to them all we can do is make educated guesses and my guess is that the wind is blowing towards that side of the building pushing the heat away, he/she may have got there from either a lower or higher floor and was looking for survivors/a way out/checking the view.

ah, I thought you were saying it was impossible for it to fall in that particular way. I agree with you.

what are you saying?