Skip to main content
Topic: 9/11 Debate (Read 3032 times) previous topic - next topic - Topic derived from CV and mad panic beha...
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #30
I'm not commenting on the validity of the reports linked by yourself or others in earlier posts, as I mentioned I don't comment on Think Tank type reports or statements from interest groups as they are often politically or socially coloured.

Thats funny, thats exactly what the official report has done.

The link, happens to go into detail on the scientific method and how it must be done without prejudice and points out why its not the case.

What you are arguing, i agree....and so do these conspiracy theorists.

What was in the report was not peer reviewed. It has since been found to be incorrect and posting the corrections has been knocked back. I forget the term they used as to why, but it was a two word vague term which explained nothing.

So don't comment on the views of those in the video, but watch the videos that were given by firefighters and bystanders at the time, that were aired worldwide in the initial stages of the collapses......and then buried within hours never to be spoken about since....including being excluded from the report....where of the 118 statements collected from firefighters who were there....ZERO were used in the report as it was not relevant! (read, contradicted the lie we were being fed)

All the evidence is there, more people are coming across it and doing their own, scientifically motivated investigations and coming to the same conclusions.

On the other hand....you can not provide any evidence which disproves any of it.

What is more likely....US sticking together doctoring some report to cover their tracks
or
The rest of the world coming together with facts that discredit the US?

People from all corners of the globe are researching this. Qualified people, not affiliated with the US government, or the US in any way and are coming to the same conclusions.


Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #31
Kruddler, my superpower is the ability to resist being drawn in by conspiracy theories. I’m like superman. Just as you’d be better off letting Superman jump in front of a speeding train or a speeding bullet, you should let me shield you from the warping power of conspiracy theories which you are apparently incapable of resisting. Follow me and I’ll lead you out of the rabbit hole ...

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #32
Kruddler, my superpower is the ability to resist being drawn in by conspiracy theories. I’m like superman. Just as you’d be better off letting Superman jump in front of a speeding train or a speeding bullet, you should let me shield you from the warping power of conspiracy theories which you are apparently incapable of resisting. Follow me and I’ll lead you out of the rabbit hole ...

Question.
Define conspiracy theory.

I've talked to a lot of people about this. The hardest thing for people to believe about this whole scenario is the US government doing that to their own people. Seems unthinkable, i agree. However, there are unclassified documents from the US that have stated they have done exactly that in the past. Its called a False Flag. Keep the people scared and they will do what you want.

So once the unthinkable has been proven to have existed previous, everything else is more plausible. The more you look into it, the more not only plausible it is, but more unlikely it is anything else but.

Once upon a time i was in your shoes mav. Instead of keeping my head in the sand, i looked into it. This whole thing works because people like you are sucked in to the lies and thinking anything else is 'crackpot' stuff. They don't want you to look, because when you do, it all falls down.

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #33
Mostly I don’t look because I have a low tolerance for bull crap and boredom. Flyboy used to set us homework by linking hour-long videos but I tuned out after a couple of minutes. I was going to look at Plandemic but somehow ended up watching Plan 9 From Outer Space (which was actually pretty good fun).

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #34
Mostly I don’t look because I have a low tolerance for bull crap and boredom. Flyboy used to set us homework by linking hour-long videos but I tuned out after a couple of minutes. I was going to look at Plandemic but somehow ended up watching Plan 9 From Outer Space (which was actually pretty good fun).
I've got a love/hate relationship with flyboy. We don't see eye to eye on a lot of things, but we agree on this.

Plan 9 is the greatest worst film of all time. Its collected dust on dvd somewhere.

As for the long videos....do yourself a favour....pick a spot in the middle of one and watch for a few minutes. You don't like, turn off. But just watch a snippet.

If nothing else you get to come back on here and have a go at all the nutters. Bet you won't.

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #35
Kruddler, my superpower is the ability to resist being drawn in by conspiracy theories. I’m like superman. Just as you’d be better off letting Superman jump in front of a speeding train or a speeding bullet, you should let me shield you from the warping power of conspiracy theories which you are apparently incapable of resisting. Follow me and I’ll lead you out of the rabbit hole ...
Ill be your Aquaman if you want, we can form our version of the Justice League.
2017 - 16th
2018 - Wooden Spoon
2019 - 16th
2020 - dare to dream? 11th is better than last I suppose
2021 - Pi$$ or get off the pot

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #36
Not really debunked @kruddler just hypothesised, there is a huge difference.

You can't ignore the basic engineering, the steel only survives for a long period of time if it's clad in something like concrete, but that cladding probably didn't survive the plane impact. Jet fuel isn't the only fuel in the fires, zinc and aluminium cladding burn very well as we all know from the London high-rise tragedy. Both metals, at least one of them, is a basic ingredient of thermite and that is also what contributed to the famous Zepplin fires, they were basically painted with thermite to make them hydrogen leak proof.

WTC7 wasn't even hit by a plane.

The fires within that building were few in number, small in size and puffing grey smoke (limited intensity) in short order.

Bang on about WTC1 and WTC2 all you like.

WTC7 is the unassailable problem.

A 47 story skyscraper collapsed symmetrically in near on free small speed - weakened or buckled steel simply does not do that.

Free fall speed demands no resistance from below.....hmmm.

That's fact, not hypothesis.

Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #37
WTC7 wasn't even hit by a plane.

The fires within that building were few in number, small in size and puffing grey smoke (limited intensity) in short order.

Bang on about WTC1 and WTC2 all you like.

WTC7 is the unassailable problem.

A 47 story skyscraper collapsed symmetrically in near on free small speed - weakened or buckled steel simply does not do that.

Free fall speed demands no resistance from below.....hmmm.

That's fact, not hypothesis.
These things didn't happen simultaneously as the conspiracy theorists like to paint, they have an order of events which is import.

The fires at the surrounding buildings weren't few in number, that is fake news, the report gleamed from the recordings of emergency workers suggest that the building at one stage had a full 10 stories ablaze from falling twin tower debris. Are you suggesting some of those who died are in on the conspiracy? I can't help but feel those claims are juvenile and irresponsible, like Trump, like QAnon.

It's probably surprising more buildings around the twin towers weren't destroyed! That fact is due to the efforts of many emergency workers some of whom died, not due to some desperate conspiracy.
The Force Awakens!


Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #39
Quote
"It is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved," stated actress and TV personality Rosie O'Donnell

"For the first time in history, steel was melted by fire. It is physically impossible," she said.
So says one of the heavy hitters of science and engineering! ;D
The Force Awakens!

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #40
So says one of the heavy hitters of science and engineering! ;D
You don't want to listen to 3400 people who design the building, maybe you need celebrity endorsements to buy in.....like the US public.  ;)

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #41
These things didn't happen simultaneously as the conspiracy theorists like to paint, they have an order of events which is import.

The fires at the surrounding buildings weren't few in number, that is fake news, the report gleamed from the recordings of emergency workers suggest that the building at one stage had a full 10 stories ablaze from falling twin tower debris. Are you suggesting some of those who died are in on the conspiracy? I can't help but feel those claims are juvenile and irresponsible, like Trump, like QAnon.

It's probably surprising more buildings around the twin towers weren't destroyed! That fact is due to the efforts of many emergency workers some of whom died, not due to some desperate conspiracy.

Those same emergency workers, along with witnesses on the street that all claim they heard explosions like a controlled demolition.
The buildings fell down like a controlled demolition.
Debris from the building showed evidence of a controlled demolition.
The cloud of debris eminating from the top of the building was the same as a controlled demolition.
The evidence of thermite, a specific military grade, in nearby apartments, are the same as a controlled demolition.
The video showed evidence of all the above, like a controlled demolition.

No skyscraper has EVER been brought down by fire.....ever. Yet 3 went in the same day....in a manner that was identical to a controlled demolition.

Its amazing no other buildings were taken out....but thats what you get from good planning of a controlled demolition.

The 'evidence' behind the fact it could NOT have been from a controlled demolition.....because it started from the top, not the bottom. Yet....there are plenty of examples of controlled demolition starting from the top.

The actual story is full of holes.

The odds of the buildings

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #42
These things didn't happen simultaneously as the conspiracy theorists like to paint, they have an order of events which is import.

The fires at the surrounding buildings weren't few in number, that is fake news, the report gleamed from the recordings of emergency workers suggest that the building at one stage had a full 10 stories ablaze from falling twin tower debris. Are you suggesting some of those who died are in on the conspiracy? I can't help but feel those claims are juvenile and irresponsible, like Trump, like QAnon.

It's probably surprising more buildings around the twin towers weren't destroyed! That fact is due to the efforts of many emergency workers some of whom died, not due to some desperate conspiracy.

That's BS LP.

Watch the video.

Hint: how hot does an office fire burn?

You avoid entirely the symmetrical fall and the free fall speed.

You're beaten and you know it.
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #43
Those same emergency workers, along with witnesses on the street that all claim they heard explosions like a controlled demolition.
The buildings fell down like a controlled demolition.
Debris from the building showed evidence of a controlled demolition.
The cloud of debris eminating from the top of the building was the same as a controlled demolition.
The evidence of thermite, a specific military grade, in nearby apartments, are the same as a controlled demolition.
The video showed evidence of all the above, like a controlled demolition.

No skyscraper has EVER been brought down by fire.....ever. Yet 3 went in the same day....in a manner that was identical to a controlled demolition.

Its amazing no other buildings were taken out....but thats what you get from good planning of a controlled demolition.

The 'evidence' behind the fact it could NOT have been from a controlled demolition.....because it started from the top, not the bottom. Yet....there are plenty of examples of controlled demolition starting from the top.

The actual story is full of holes.

The odds of the buildings


Plenty of evidence of explosions at the bottom too!
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: 9/11 Debate

Reply #44
Plenty of evidence of explosions at the bottom too!
Yes, but it was a top down controlled demolition rather than a bottom up.

The report says it couldn't have been controlled demo because it started at the top......which is a bald faced lie.