Hello, is anyone in here familiar with the Laws of Physics!?!?!
ANYONE, please help, the ignorance in this thread is TURBOSUPERMEGAHUGE!
Laws of Physics and The Official Story of 9-11 is like Fire vs Ice, its like BigMacs vs Sushi, its like Yin vs Yang.
I quit. There is so much evidence posted in this thread that anyone with a decent brain and some critical thinking will have to conclude that what we have been told by the officials is an OUTRIGHT LIE.
Once again: The Laws of Physics.
The End.
Originally posted by Katsu
Hello, is anyone in here familiar with the Laws of Physics!?!?!ANYONE, please help, the ignorance in this thread is TURBOSUPERMEGAHUGE!
Laws of Physics and The Official Story of 9-11 is like Fire vs Ice, its like BigMacs vs Sushi, its like Yin vs Yang.
I quit. There is so much evidence posted in this thread that anyone with a decent brain and some critical thinking will have to conclude that what we have been told by the officials is an OUTRIGHT LIE.
Once again: The Laws of Physics.
The End.
Instead of just shouting "LAWS OF PHYSICS" which you've shown several times in several threads that you have no understanding of, why not actually go and learn them yourself.
I mean the continuing spouting of "the towers fell at free fall speeds" in this forum...despite being shown conclusive and irrefutable proof to the contrary that some pieces of the tower took upwards of 24 seconds to collapse (some 3 times that of freefall) is getting ridiculous.
So please...do relate these laws of physics to specific points regarding 9/11.
Originally posted by Katsu
Hello, is anyone in here familiar with the Laws of Physics!?!?!ANYONE, please help, the ignorance in this thread is TURBOSUPERMEGAHUGE!
Laws of Physics and The Official Story of 9-11 is like Fire vs Ice, its like BigMacs vs Sushi, its like Yin vs Yang.
I quit. There is so much evidence posted in this thread that anyone with a decent brain and some critical thinking will have to conclude that what we have been told by the officials is an OUTRIGHT LIE.
Once again: The Laws of Physics.
The End.
hey your back.yep well said. 👆
We will probably never know what exactly happened on 9/11 but I believe that the government definately knows that its not what they told us and that they had prior knowledge to these events. To believe the government is like listening to the boy who cried wolf. And as for the freefall speed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz43hcKYBm4
Originally posted by jgiant
We will probably never know what exactly happened on 9/11 but I believe that the government definately knows that its not what they told us and that they had prior knowledge to these events. To believe the government is like listening to the boy who cried wolf. And as for the freefall speed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz43hcKYBm4
Noone's ever really denied that the external stuctures of the building fell in free fall...They obviously did because they fell out the way (not consistent with controlled demolition) and had no resistance. Some parts of the internal core and some floors stood for upto 24 seconds (almost 80 floors of some parts of the building)
Originally posted by jaden101Yea, well if someone can explain to me why John Gross and the other NIST experts are stumbling over their words. I think you jaden should be a spokesman for NIST you make better sense than they do about the subject they should be experts in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng&feature=related
Noone's ever really denied that the external stuctures of the building fell in free fall...They obviously did because they fell out the way (not consistent with controlled demolition) and had no resistance. Some parts of the internal core and some floors stood for upto 24 seconds (almost 80 floors of some parts of the building)
Originally posted by jgiant
Yea, well if someone can explain to me why John Gross and the other NIST experts are stumbling over their words. I think you jaden should be a spokesman for NIST you make better sense than they do about the subject they should be experts in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0GHVEKrhng&feature=related
Taking small excerpts from any interview then you can make someone look like they're getting confused. Someone taking questions about a 10,000 page document is hardly going to have the entire thing memorized are they?
So yeah...Clever editing and taking things out of context...The pinnacle of conspiracy theorist skills everywhere.
I'm gonna take our discussion here, jaden, because this is where it belongs.
I'm not defending Mr. Jones. I was putting out my thoughts for anyone to correct/agree/dismantle or whatever. IMO, in the large scope of things it could have happened a plethora of ways and the reason would have still been the same... That's why I care more about certain types of "evidence" than others...
I think the most substantial evidence is not trying to prove it was a bomb or whatever, but the way the people in charge acted. And how instead of really talking about the event in depth (really delving into all possibilities, so there would be no doubts), everyone was more interested in how the President reacted, and that story made major news. Let me tell you: if the President were a real American, he would be shocked just like the rest of us. No need to turn it into a big news story. So what if he was in a school when it happened? So was I! I care more about getting to the bottom of this. This is the biggest thing to happen in American history in a long time!
But instead of those who originally investigated it confronting people about it and saying "I know I'm right, and if another in depth investigation will prove it and make you shut up, I'll gladly do it again so all of you can see." they try to hide all this and label them "bonkers off the wall nutcase". What do they have to hide? Why not just investigate it again and prove us wrong? If they could, I'd gladly admit I was wrong, but they avoid it at all costs and just start name calling if you challenge what they told us. And that leads me to believe there is probably something very wrong with what we were told.
Not to mention NO ONE was held accountable for this. If they were so incompetent to let this happen, they should have been fired. I mean, why risk it, right?
Can you at least see where I'm coming from? That's all I ask...
Originally posted by Bat Dude
I'm gonna take our discussion here, jaden, because this is where it belongs.I'm not defending Mr. Jones. I was putting out my thoughts for anyone to correct/agree/dismantle or whatever. IMO, in the large scope of things it could have happened a plethora of ways and the reason would have still been the same... That's why I care more about certain types of "evidence" than others...
I think the most substantial evidence is not trying to prove it was a bomb or whatever, but the way the people in charge acted. And how instead of really talking about the event in depth (really delving into all possibilities, so there would be no doubts), everyone was more interested in how the President reacted, and that story made major news. Let me tell you: if the President were a real American, he would be shocked just like the rest of us. No need to turn it into a big news story. So what if he was in a school when it happened? So was I! I care more about getting to the bottom of this. This is the biggest thing to happen in American history in a long time!
But instead of those who originally investigated it confronting people about it and saying "I know I'm right, and if another in depth investigation will prove it and make you shut up, I'll gladly do it again so all of you can see." they try to hide all this and label them "bonkers off the wall nutcase". What do they have to hide? Why not just investigate it again and prove us wrong? If they could, I'd gladly admit I was wrong, but they avoid it at all costs and just start name calling if you challenge what they told us. And that leads me to believe there is probably something very wrong with what we were told.
Not to mention NO ONE was held accountable for this. If they were so incompetent to let this happen, they should have been fired. I mean, why risk it, right?
Can you at least see where I'm coming from? That's all I ask...
The problem is that it doesn't matter who investigates it and how in-depth it is there is people who simply won't believe it because the people who would be assigned to investigating it will have to have been told by the government and then by default, to the conspiracy theorists, will be corrupt and therefor lie.
There's been 3 massively detailed investigations into 9/11...None of them found any scientific evidence of controlled demolition despite conducting thousands of 1st hand scientific tests conducted by relavent experts in fire investigation, building engineering, aviation experts etc, yet people are willing to believe a man because he's a physicist (despite the fact that his field of expertise is cold fusion and has nothing to do with the events of 9/11) and his feeble 2nd hand evidence which consists of altered pictures (as shown by video evidence i already provided) and blatent lies and/or ignorance of the science he's actually using as evidence.
Quite frankly, there's only so many times you can prove these people wrong before not bothering because they don't care about the evidence you bring up because they just say it's all lies.
I mean think about it...Think about everyone who would have had to either have been paid off or silenced between the planning of 9/11 and now.
Not only would it be the 10,000 people who worked in the towers whom you were actually planning to kill and who would've had to have either been complicit in or ignorant of hundreds of explosives experts drilling into the walls around their work places and wiring up explosives but leaving no evidence. You would have to silence all those explosive experts who would know they were involved in the killing of fellow Americans. You would have to silence or pay off all the people who have investigated since.
What's odd is that you always here the conspiracy theorists saying that "people have been threatened if they spoke out" yet noone has ever provided an actual interview of one of these people saying they were threatened...They can't even get a single name of a person who was threatened...They just say things like "firemen were threatened".
Think about the demolition planning...It takes several months to plan and execute the demolition of an empty building and people around it know it would be going on...Here's to how long it was take to plan and execute the demolition of a building that has 10,000 people working in it and some 80,000 visitors EVERY DAY without any of them noticing anything going on.
As for the way people acted. There have been tons of stupid and ill thought out accusations such as NORAD telling the FAA to stand down...Despite the FAA not being answerable to NORAD and despite the fact that if they were stood down then the hundreds of flights that were in the air above the US at the time of the attacks would have had no air traffic controllers to guide them. Also despite the fact that there are ACTUAL RECORDINGS of air traffic controllers talking to the planes and hijackers at the time of the attacks yet are supposedly not to have been working at the time.
Then there's the accusations that the planes were fake despite the fact that there are records of phone calls from passengers on the planes talking to their loved ones at the time of the hijackings.
Then there's the accusation that NORAD should have scrambled jets to shoot down the planes as soon as they knew they were hijacked and should have known they were hijacked the moment they went off course despite the fact that NORAD's radar, at the time of the attacks, didn't even cover internal US airspace and they didn't even know of the hijackings until after the 1st plane had struck.
Then there's the great accusation of a missle hitting the pentagon despite the fact that there's photographs of pieces of plane lying on the grass outside the pentagon...Of course the conspiracy theorists get around this by saying that the pieces of plane were brought in by the FBI to cover up the missle attack...This is despite the fact that there were thousands of people standing watching from all around the pentago and none of them saw men in black suits taking pieces of plane from trucks and scattering them about. This is also despite the fact that it's a totally absurd idea that the FBI have a warehouse where they keep pieces of blown up planes for just such occasions as where they need to fake terrorist attacks.
I could go on and on and on tackling pieces of "evidence" and accusations thrown up in this thread but i've done it all before...From the alleged quote from Leslie Robertson (chief engineer on the WTC) supposedly saying that the towers were designed to withstand the impacts and shouldn't have fell...Despite the fact that when you actually read the entire quote he says the complete opposite.
Or the evidence from Lernar-Lam seismic observatory that the conspiracy theorists say proves that large explosions happened just as the towers started to fall and supposedly prove controlled demolition...And the fact the scientists who actually recorded and analysed that data said that the idea of controlled demolition being proven by their reading is complete nonsense.
I do agree that the focus on how people reacted was complete nonsense. Of course if they have to focus on completely subjective things like that then the conspiracy theorists scientific evidence has completely gone to the dogs.
Then there's the fact that stories have changed god knows how many times over the years...From mini nukes to explosives to thermite.
That brings up the question of the "evidence for explosives" again...They use the supposed "squibs" coming out of the side of the WTC as evidence for explosives...despite the fact that they're coming out of windows and that windows have never been a stuctural support for any building...
I'd love to see how well a real demoltion would go if all they did was wire up explosives to the windows of the buildings.
Then there's the fact that you only see these "squibs" in erratic places...Perhaps 1 on a single floor and at different parts of different floors....Not really a way they demolish a buildings is it?...Given that you're supposed to blow out every support on the same floor and do the same for a number of floors throughout the building.
Then there's the "free fall speeds" of the building falling...Despite the fact that the video evidence shows parts of the building standing for more that 24 seconds...Some 3 times that of freefall speeds.
Of course they then use the same videos of parts of the buildings standing for over 24 seconds to prove entirely different points that make no sense either.
Originally posted by jaden101Those are some of the biggest points that they should be able to explain after 7 years of investigating.
Taking small excerpts from any interview then you can make someone look like they're getting confused. Someone taking questions about a 10,000 page document is hardly going to have the entire thing memorized are they?So yeah...Clever editing and taking things out of context...The pinnacle of conspiracy theorist skills everywhere.
Originally posted by jgiant
We will probably never know what exactly happened on 9/11 but I believe that the government definately knows that its not what they told us and that they had prior knowledge to these events. To believe the government is like listening to the boy who cried wolf. And as for the freefall speed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz43hcKYBm4
dude why did you have to bring this topic back again? just when it was about ready to die. 😠
Strikes me as odd that you would want this thread buried. Are you afraid of the truth.
Also odd that you say that this topic was about to die yet you continually bring it up in every thread you can (along with the Clinton thing) regardless of whether they have anything to do with those thread topics or not (usually the later)