Oh Goodie! ... More on 911 (inside job) :)

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Keenly

Guest
You think buildings are designed to survive a direct hit by a fully fueled commercial jet - well I guess that explains it.

BTW, building 7 was hit by pieces of building 1 as it fell - read the links I posted.

Again, you are just making another circular argument by saying these guys disagree. Have you figured out what a circular argument is yet? Plus, you are making an appeal to popular opinion - it doesn't matter how many people want an investigation. You need to look at my thread on Logical fallacies because you are using many of them.

oh but some how ALL other surrounding buildings, MOST of witch were CLOSER than wtc 7, got more falling debris on them ...but they were still standing



dude, you, as a person, simply can not, and i honestly mean its 100% impossible, for you to prove the official reports version of why wtc 7 fell

if thats ALL you do in this thread, which has not been much btw, then you will have proven yourself a worthy debater, cause so far, im not seeing it
 

wyteboi

Well-Known Member
hmm....911?? am not american but for me...IMHO it was all staged...it was too perfect...no way a plane can do that...
and i seen that everyday after 911 for along time.......... with no internet , just mainsteam media to watch .........I KNEW IT WAS JUST TOO PERFECT. It did not take youtube to convince me, i seen the shit with my own eyes too, and with common sense , you just KNOW them planes could not have done that. :confused: So i researched and here i am............
GOOD DAY ALL!
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
A person in home construction is not an engineer, his skills do not translate over to 140 story steel structures from pine wood framed houses. The construction of the two is so vastly different that complete retraining would be needed.
Thank you, NoDrama. bongsmilie For you.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
It's been a while since this photo was posted.

Do these beams look "buckled" to you guys?




You can clearly see some kind of residue on the beams around the "buckling". I guess it's just aluminum and rust, though, right?
 

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
are you still high..... In 1945 a b-29 bomber ran into the 75th floor of the Empire State Building THAT is why the buildings WERE designed to withstand impact from a boeing 707. i did NOT just think that up

"WTC Engineer Says Building Would Survive Jumbo Jet ... which found the Twin Towers could withstand the impact of a Boeing 707"


You have to be a kid at this point.........
And they said the Titanic was unsinkable didn't they. Was the sinking of the Titanic also a conspiracy?

I'm going to explain this real slow so you can understand it. Nearly everything you have posted is something called "circular reasoning." Now let me give you an example of circular reasoning that maybe you can understand.

Suppose someone says the following.

"I know God exists because the Bible says so and the Bible was written by God."

You see, that is the same type of "proof" you keep babbling on with. You keep saying that x,y & z must be true because this or that conspiracy nut say it is. You see, this is circular reasoning and it is fallacious.

What you have not done is provided any actual evidence. You have repeated your fallacies many times, but you have not DEMONSTRATED anything.

I provided actual physical evidence that disproved every claim made by the nuts you keep referring to and the only thing you have to say is "not according to this guy."

So, I have to ask, do you have any actual evidence or are you simply going to repeat fallacious statements ad-infinitum?
 

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
rick, if you use an axe to chop a tree down, does the tree collapse straight down? or does it tip over like this


| / __


'

so, in contrast, if a plane, the "axe" if you will, hit the towers

the tops should have fallen over sideways and left a stump of a skyscraper


thats not what happened...
If a moron with zero understanding of physics or engineering tries to compare chopping down a tree with the WTC coming down is he worth arguing with? No.
 

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
WTC #7 was not hit by a plane! It's the engineers that say fire brought that building down Rick not me. I just thought that if that's possible why not do it regularly? Seems somewhat logical no? easier faster cheaper. Yes I question the official report, you talk as if #7 doesn't exist. or didn't sorry. If you look at just that building alone your whole post and points don't apply.
Gee I don't know, maybe because it isn't safe? Is it really possible for someone to be that monumentally stupid that they would contemplate setting skyscrapers in downtown Manhattan on fire in order to bring them down?
 

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
It's been a while since this photo was posted.

Do these beams look "buckled" to you guys?




You can clearly see some kind of residue on the beams around the "buckling". I guess it's just aluminum and rust, though, right?
So now you are implying that if there is a single straight piece of beam that proves no beams buckled. Maybe it also proves the buildings didn't actually fall too.

By the way, see those diagonal cuts. There is no way explosives or thermite can make a cut like that. Those cuts and the residue was made by a rescue worker cutting those beams with a torch. How is that not obvious?

Your own picture disproves your own theory.
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
By the way, see those diagonal cuts. There is no way explosives or thermite can make a cut like that. Those cuts and the residue was made by a rescue worker cutting those beams with a torch. How is that not obvious?

Your own picture disproves your own theory.
Really? No way that thermite could have made those cuts, eh?

"Thermite reactions have many uses. Thermite is not an explosive, instead it operates by exposing a very small area of metal to extremely high temperatures. Intense heat focused on a small spot can be used to cut through metal or weld metal components together by melting a very thin film where the components meet."
 

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
The thing I find most ridiculous about this thread and the whole 911 conspiracy is that so many people that have no background in physics or engineering try to take such a complex scenario and figure it out based on their layman's intuition. I refuse to see how anyone could be that simplistic in their thought process as to believe this is possible. Even when we look at the teeny tiny handful of "scientists" that support these theories we find they have no actual experience in this particular field of study. Everything else is merely one fallacy after the next. We see circular reasoning, begging the question, appeal to popular belief, etc...

What I find intriguing is that people can possibly be that woefully incapable of looking at something and making a sound, rational analysis about what they see. My theory on this is that the ability to think is something some have and some lack and that we have no objective way of measuring it at this point in time. Quite fascinating IMO.
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
holy shit, you just convinced me. :shock: :clap:



now what? :roll:











It's been a while since this photo was posted.

Do these beams look "buckled" to you guys?




You can clearly see some kind of residue on the beams around the "buckling". I guess it's just aluminum and rust, though, right?
 

wyteboi

Well-Known Member
It's been a while since this photo was posted.

Do these beams look "buckled" to you guys?




You can clearly see some kind of residue on the beams around the "buckling". I guess it's just aluminum and rust, though, right?




:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
yea thats quite a "buckle" there aint it.....
and there are PLENTY more pics better then this one that show a bunch of "buckled beams" on the ground in nice 20 foot sections.


rick man, c'mon your better then this.
why are you doing this to yourself?
why is this so hard to believe?
we are not trying to feed you a line of conspiracy crap..... just showin you FACTS
Is it THAT hard to believe SOMEONE might have had them buildings pulled for profit?
I am not sayin bush did it, and I also would like to know how all those people required to do this "job" could just keep quiet........ but the fact remains that it happened and they did keep quiet (except barry jennings who died shortly after speaking on the topic) and i am not sayin the government had him killed...... but the fact remains that it happened and they still wont tell us how he died..... So yes it IS our own government's fault that ALL this has not been investigated the right way.:wall:
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
If a moron with zero understanding of physics or engineering tries to compare chopping down a tree with the WTC coming down is he worth arguing with? No.
they won't let me say a contractor knows a little bit about engineering, but a tree and a huge building are apparently the exact same thing. :neutral:


i'm starting to understand the term "nut job". :hump:


:mrgreen: bongsmilie :peace:
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
Really? No way that thermite could have made those cuts, eh?

"Thermite reactions have many uses. Thermite is not an explosive, instead it operates by exposing a very small area of metal to extremely high temperatures. Intense heat focused on a small spot can be used to cut through metal or weld metal components together by melting a very thin film where the components meet."
hun, it only works downwards. you can't cut sideways with it. it would just drip off the side and hit the floor. :roll:
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
I feel sorry for me too, it took FOREVER. There were like a bazillion pieces. Then my son godzilla'ed it and it was no more. :cry:

so if a contractor knows shit about engineering, how the fuck do you know anything about buildings falling? can i please see YOUR credentials? :roll:

legos don't count.



you are defeating your own argument. you do realize that don't you? we are not allowed to accept the opinion of a person who builds homes, but we should listen to you? lol :mrgreen: :eyesmoke:
 

doobnVA

Well-Known Member
Now let me give you an example of circular reasoning that maybe you can understand.

Suppose someone says the following.

"I know the 9/11 commission report is true because the 9/11 commission says so and the 9/11 commission report was written by the 9/11 commission."



What you have not done is provided any actual evidence. You have repeated your fallacies many times, but you have not DEMONSTRATED anything.
Hmm... so who's using circular logic, again?

RickWhite, you always come out swinging against "circular logic" while using the VERY SAME circular logic try try and disprove the circular logic of others.


What you fail to "remember" is that, if not for a group of women who lost their husbands in the 9/11 attacks, there would have been NO investigation. None. These women pushed for an investigation, and after a YEAR (and having to enlist the mainstream media in their cause) they were finally granted AN investigation, but hardly any of their questions/concerns were addressed.

There's a movie you can watch (I'm sure you won't), it's called 9/11: Press for Truth - that details the struggle of these women that led to the 9/11 commission report, and the TRUTH about the commission's report and the commission itself. Bush made sure the cards were stacked AGAINST a legitimate investigation in the first place, which is why there was never a legitimate investigation.

This is why New Yorkers are STILL pushing for a legitimate investigation into the attacks on 9/11, because the first one was a complete wash.
 

wyteboi

Well-Known Member
Gee I don't know, maybe because it isn't safe? Is it really possible for someone to be that monumentally stupid that they would contemplate setting skyscrapers in downtown Manhattan on fire in order to bring them down?
It seemed to work VERY well ! Had they cleared the area first it would have been safe as demo.
why dont you follow YOUR own fuckin directions and quit using "circular reasoning"
You are going by what a few people say(is that not "circular reasoning")......I am going by what I fucking seen with my own eyes AND what thousands of engineers and scientist are saying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top