911. Do People Actually Believe This S**t?
Discussion
AW111 said:
The scientific solution to this is very simple.
Hypothesis : it is impossible for the WTC to collapse the way it did solely as a result of the airplane impact.
Experiment : build another one, let it age for a few years, crash a fully-fuelled plane into it, and watch what happens
7 times is a good statistical numberHypothesis : it is impossible for the WTC to collapse the way it did solely as a result of the airplane impact.
Experiment : build another one, let it age for a few years, crash a fully-fuelled plane into it, and watch what happens
ThunderGuts said:
AW111 said:
The scientific solution to this is very simple.
Hypothesis : it is impossible for the WTC to collapse the way it did solely as a result of the airplane impact.
Experiment : build another one, let it age for a few years, crash a fully-fuelled plane into it, and watch what happens
7 times is a good statistical numberHypothesis : it is impossible for the WTC to collapse the way it did solely as a result of the airplane impact.
Experiment : build another one, let it age for a few years, crash a fully-fuelled plane into it, and watch what happens
GOG440 said:
And for the 580th time of asking, how did "they" get the tonnes of explosives and miles of detonation cord into the building without anyone noticing?
Any proof at all of them being rigged for demolition?
Military explosives were used, not civilian crap. I've watched enough films to know a seal team can run around sticking things on walls without cables, then run off into the distance and press something with a red button on it. I'm sure any conspiracy theorist will find this a thoroughly plausible and scientific explanation.Any proof at all of them being rigged for demolition?
size said:
Military explosives were used, not civilian crap. I've watched enough films to know a seal team can run around sticking things on walls without cables, then run off into the distance and press something with a red button on it. I'm sure any conspiracy theorist will find this a thoroughly plausible and scientific explanation.
But did the explosives have a blinking red light on them? after all you must let the baddies know where you've planted them.Has CCTV been checked to see if there are any guys dressed in black fleeing the scene with barely a second to spare hurling themselves to the floor as the building explodes then dusting themselves off, casually walking away while making a witty remark like "I've always enjoyed a 7up!"
building severely damaged on the other side from the video (nearest the towers), extensive fires near the bottom floors, the big beam holding the whole thing together fails, collapses from the bottom middle on the other side (penthouse goes first as we see)
north face that we see ends up mostly unsupported and collapses very quickly, maybe even at free-fall speed at some point
simples
north face that we see ends up mostly unsupported and collapses very quickly, maybe even at free-fall speed at some point
simples
valiant said:
But did the explosives have a blinking red light on them? after all you must let the baddies know where you've planted them.
Has CCTV been checked to see if there are any guys dressed in black fleeing the scene with barely a second to spare hurling themselves to the floor as the building explodes then dusting themselves off, casually walking away while making a witty remark like "I've always enjoyed a 7up!"
Am sure there will be footage somewhere of 4 executives who are bald with long beards wearing cool as fHas CCTV been checked to see if there are any guys dressed in black fleeing the scene with barely a second to spare hurling themselves to the floor as the building explodes then dusting themselves off, casually walking away while making a witty remark like "I've always enjoyed a 7up!"
k shades walking out of the dust cloud high fiving each other, before grabbing hold of ropes dropped from an apache chopper that flies off, the last thing you see/hear before abrupt ending of footage is someone shouting 'get some' and machine guns opening up with pinpoint precision accuracy at camera lens.
Hugo a Gogo said:
scherzkeks said:
Hugo a Gogo said:
simples
Sums up the majority of "debunker" posts ITT, honestly. All he has are a number of half baked theories that a junior school kid could disprove, along with the abilities to ignore any reasonable question asked and only cherry pick the pieces out of research that fit the conspiracy theories.
scherzkeks said:
Freefall isn't a theory -- it is fact. The next step would be an investigation. 
Pretty sure it was investigated, no?I'm still lost, I'm afraid. Are you saying that the attack on the WTC didn't happen? Or that it did, and was used as a cover story to allow the demolition of another building for some reason?
What purpose would there be to use a terror attack to destroy another building, that wouldn't be much more easily achieved some other way? Staging a large gas explosion, for example...
Hugo a Gogo said:
scherzkeks said:
Hugo a Gogo said:
simples
Sums up the majority of "debunker" posts ITT, honestly. He's going for option 2 now.
Kill the thread with tedium.
There all basic ploys of people out of their depth trying to escape with a modicum of dignity and integrity intact.
scherzkeks said:
WinstonWolf said:
He won't answer because he knows if he does his lunatic theory collapses.
How are the supports symmetrically removed? How?
Freefall isn't a theory -- it is fact. The next step would be an investigation. How are the supports symmetrically removed? How?
Freefall isn't a fact, it's a phrase latched onto by nutters. The latter is a fact.
So how was it rigged for 'Freefall'?
neilr said:
The trouble with 'conspiracy theorists' (as opposed to people who are somewhat cynical of what the government tell them) is that they seem unable to process information like the rest of us.
The moon landings are a good example. There is more than ample evidence that man has been to the moon. The numerous crackpot theories put forward as to how it was faked simply ignore all of this. Not to mention showing a total lack of understanding whent hey start blithering on about the shadows in the images.
Holocaust deniers are the same, the Nazis filmed and meticulously recorded everything they did (bet they were glad the did that once they were in the dock Nuremberg). These people are simply denying the evidence that is in front of them. I could go on. (but fortunately I won't)
Clearly there have been plenty of times that governments DID collude and lie to the public for their own nefarious ends. The gulf of Tomkin, operation northwoods have already been mentioned. Anyone who accepts the governments version of anything without questioning it is just as much a fool as your average conspiracy nutter.
When you really look at 9-11 there might well be a case for the US government seizing the opportunity to march around the globe off the back of what happened, and even at a stretch ignoring intelligence to those ends, but planning it? Governments can't make tea without someone fking it up so expect them to pull off something of that magnitude off is just la la land.
Thats well put and I agree with it all, especially the first and last paragraphs. My best mate is a huge conspiracy theorist and whilst he is right to question 'official' versions of events at times, he often arrives at conclusions more baffling and less probable than the reported one.The moon landings are a good example. There is more than ample evidence that man has been to the moon. The numerous crackpot theories put forward as to how it was faked simply ignore all of this. Not to mention showing a total lack of understanding whent hey start blithering on about the shadows in the images.
Holocaust deniers are the same, the Nazis filmed and meticulously recorded everything they did (bet they were glad the did that once they were in the dock Nuremberg). These people are simply denying the evidence that is in front of them. I could go on. (but fortunately I won't)
Clearly there have been plenty of times that governments DID collude and lie to the public for their own nefarious ends. The gulf of Tomkin, operation northwoods have already been mentioned. Anyone who accepts the governments version of anything without questioning it is just as much a fool as your average conspiracy nutter.
When you really look at 9-11 there might well be a case for the US government seizing the opportunity to march around the globe off the back of what happened, and even at a stretch ignoring intelligence to those ends, but planning it? Governments can't make tea without someone f
king it up so expect them to pull off something of that magnitude off is just la la land.Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff