9/11 consipracy movie

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: BrokenVisage

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.

It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.

This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.

If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.

You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.

You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?

there is a difference between having an open mind and evaluating evidence as to its worth, and taking completely untenable positions that have no basis in reality other than early reports by confused eyewitnesses who didn't know what they were seeing or talking about that don't hold up to later scrutiny. it'd be like maintaining that the earth is flat when confronted with video from the moon

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Acanthus

You came back to it because i called you on it.

The BEST engineers in the world, and the people who taught them agree...

Nope, I was already in the process of responding when you made a post trying to call me out . Look at the time stamp. You still haven't provided a single link supporting your "fires melted WTC steel" theory? Shame. If they're the best engineers in the world, why are they being called out by other engineeers? The official version has obvious holes, including the simple fact that they never even considered the precollapse explosions

explosions dont melt steel.

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Yeah, I pretty much shot down the sad attempts to deny pre collapse explosions "because they didn't register on seismographs". The 1993 Truck Bombing at WTC did not register on seismographs either. GG.

well it was the conspiracy theorists claiming that explosions showed up on the seismographs to begin with. and now that that theory has been conclusively shot down you're backing away from it. classic internet arguing technique: take an untenable position, then when it's pointed out how bad that position is claim you never took it. awesome.

Pre collapse explosions have never been shot down...and that was the whole point of bringing up the seismographs. it's the ones who tried to deny precollapse explosions that have backed away from the seismograph issue, since seisomgraphcs never even picked up the 1993 WTC truck bombing.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: noto12ious
They certainly back it up with facts. What bubble are you living in? Are you saying there have been no "Loss of freedom"? Are you saying there have never been "scams and coverups" or "vote fraud", etc?

I'm not saying that there have never been scams, political murders, etc, but when someone seems to get stuck on those ideas, they fit the profile of a schizophrenic. People with schizophrenia seem to be drawn to that sort of stuff, and I bet if you looked at the userbase at those sites, you'd find that the incidence of schizophrenia is much, much higher than a site like this, for example.

You see, the issue is both simpler and goes much deeper than just arguing the topic at hand. Once you discover that the person fits a profile, you're able to understand the reason of why they act a certain way, and it also gives their stories less credibility.

I know that people think you should dissect the point the person is making exclusively, but when you dig a little deeper, you may find that the point they're trying to make is simply a side effect of a condition they have. For instance, if a normal, rational person claims the police are after them they might have a point. But if a schizophrenic claims the government is after them, it makes their story much, much less likely, since schizophrenics often claim that. There's something about having that condition that makes them think that way.

It may be a simple condition which makes them think in complex, yet flawed, ways and distorts their perception of reality.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: noto12ious
I think 91TTZ missed the memo,

Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect

The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.

Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President?s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers Gold Medal (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. He chaired 8 major international conferences, and is one of the country?s foremost experts on National Security.

Bowman worked secretly for the US government on the Star Wars project and was the first to coin the very term in a 1977 secret memo. After Bowman realized that the program was only ever intended to be used as an aggressive and not defensive tool, as part of a plan to initiate a nuclear war with the Soviets, he left the program and campaigned against it.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm

Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?

considering the strategic defense initiative, commonly known as star wars, wasn't even proposed until march 23, 1983, that fact is obviously wrong. if such a basic fact is compeltely bogus, i can't trust anything else stated.

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: Acanthus

You came back to it because i called you on it.

The BEST engineers in the world, and the people who taught them agree...

Nope, I was already in the process of responding when you made a post trying to call me out . Look at the time stamp. You still haven't provided a single link supporting your "fires melted WTC steel" theory? Shame. If they're the best engineers in the world, why are they being called out by other engineeers? The official version has obvious holes, including the simple fact that they never even considered the precollapse explosions

explosions dont melt steel.

What's your point? Thermite does iirc. Not saying it's has "explosion" properties.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

There's a peice of debris that is knocked off the side of the building at the exact moment the tripod is shaken by an earthquake type rumble. Look harder

As for popular mechanics...they don't address the molten steel issue. Read the article again.

so a camera miles away shakes at exactly the same time a puff of smoke comes out of the right side of the building. a puff of smoke that isn't any larger than any other puff of smoke that have been continuously coming off that side. and this is your evidence?

i wonder how long it takes for the shock wave from an explosion to travel down the building, through the ground for a couple miles, and then back up another building, in comparison to the speed of light in the atmosphere?

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: noto12ious
They certainly back it up with facts. What bubble are you living in? Are you saying there have been no "Loss of freedom"? Are you saying there have never been "scams and coverups" or "vote fraud", etc?

I'm not saying that there have never been scams, political murders, etc, but when someone seems to get stuck on those ideas, they fit the profile of a schizophrenic.

That's your opinion. I look at them as realists who know the cold hard facts.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: noto12ious
As for popular mechanics...they don't address the molten steel issue. Read the article again.

so the steel was still liquid, weeks later? is that what you're saying? 3000 degrees for weeks?

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious
As for popular mechanics...they don't address the molten steel issue. Read the article again.

so the steel was still liquid, weeks later? is that what you're saying? 3000 degrees for weeks?

That's what demolition crews have stated, along with fire fighters cleaning up at ground zero. Not just weeks, months

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious

There's a peice of debris that is knocked off the side of the building at the exact moment the tripod is shaken by an earthquake type rumble. Look harder

As for popular mechanics...they don't address the molten steel issue. Read the article again.

so a camera miles away shakes at exactly the same time a puff of smoke comes out of the right side of the building. a puff of smoke that isn't any larger than any other puff of smoke that have been continuously coming off that side. and this is your evidence?

i wonder how long it takes for the shock wave from an explosion to travel down the building, through the ground for a couple miles, and then back up another building, in comparison to the speed of light in the atmosphere?

A puff of smoke rises...and is not considered debris. Debris (dark colored) actually falls off the right side of the building, downwards. I provided many links as evidence...go look at them again.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Pre collapse explosions have never been shot down...and that was the whole point of bringing up the seismographs. it's the ones who tried to deny precollapse explosions that have backed away from the seismograph issue, since seisomgraphcs never even picked up the 1993 WTC truck bombing.

conspiracy theorists claimed that the seismographs showed the precollapse explosions by using graphs that didn't show the specifics. when proven wrong, they backed away from it.

everyone is shooting down your precollapse explosion bullsh!t. THERE WERE NO BOMBS AT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. the explosions referred to were the collapse of the buildings, which looked like normal imposions to the untrained eye that had seen building imploded on the discovery channel. that's it.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

What's your point? Thermite does iirc. Not saying it's has "explosion" properties.

the whole building would have had to have been laced with thermite to create 'rivers'. it would have needed to be between the fire proofing and the steel columns.

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Pre collapse explosions have never been shot down...and that was the whole point of bringing up the seismographs. it's the ones who tried to deny precollapse explosions that have backed away from the seismograph issue, since seisomgraphcs never even picked up the 1993 WTC truck bombing.

conspiracy theorists claimed that the seismographs showed the precollapse explosions by using graphs that didn't show the specifics. when proven wrong, they backed away from it.

everyone is shooting down your precollapse explosion bullsh!t. THERE WERE NO BOMBS AT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. the explosions referred to were the collapse of the buildings, which looked like normal imposions to the untrained eye that had seen building imploded on the discovery channel. that's it.

you're incorrect. the explosions occurred many minutes (and seconds) before any "official" structural collapse occurred. FBI, NYPD, NYFD, MSNBC, CNN, USA Today all reported secondary devices behing found inside the towers You really need to do your homework, you've missed all the critical points in this thread...and you didn't even know molten steel was found at ground zero?

don't try to deny pre collapse explosions using the seismographs issue...as stated already, pre collapse explosions did occur, and seismographs did not pick them up...same way seismographs did not pick up the 1993 WTC truck bombings

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious
As for popular mechanics...they don't address the molten steel issue. Read the article again.

so the steel was still liquid, weeks later? is that what you're saying? 3000 degrees for weeks?

That's what demolition crews have stated, along with fire fighters cleaning up at ground zero. Not just weeks, months

that is possibly the most ridiculous claim i have ever heard. if you're going to state something so outlandish you're going to need solid proof, not some random link of some random conspiracy theory website full of half quotes by made up people and 6 degrees of rumor.

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious

What's your point? Thermite does iirc. Not saying it's has "explosion" properties.

the whole building would have had to have been laced with thermite to create 'rivers'. it would have needed to be between the fire proofing and the steel columns.

Who really knows what caused molten steel at WTC? Nobody has a definitive answer. More reason to investigate

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: noto12ious
A puff of smoke rises...and is not considered debris. Debris (dark colored) actually falls off the right side of the building, downwards. I provided many links as evidence...go look at them again.

dense enough smoke certainly does go downward. ever seen a diesel truck take off from a stop?

additionally, THERE IS SOMETHING POURING OUT OF THE RIGHT SIDE OF THAT BUILDING AND GOING DOWNWARD FOR THE WHOLE GODDAMNED VIDEO. again, are you completely blind?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: noto12ious
you're incorrect. the explosions occurred many minutes (and seconds) before any "official" structural collapse occurred. FBI, NYPD, NYFD, MSNBC, CNN, USA Today all reported secondary devices behing found inside the towers You really need to do your homework, you've missed all the critical points in this thread...and you didn't even know molten steel was found at ground zero?

don't try to deny pre collapse explosions using the seismographs issue...as stated already, pre collapse explosions did occur, and seismographs did not pick them up...same way seismographs did not pick up the 1993 WTC truck bombings

do you know how rumors get started?

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

I'm not saying that there have never been scams, political murders, etc, but when someone seems to get stuck on those ideas, they fit the profile of a schizophrenic.

That's your opinion. I look at them as realists who know the cold hard facts.

That's just it- I didn't even specify what the conspiracy theorists are crying conspiracy about, I just made a general statement that they're stuck on the idea that everything's a conspiracy. And yet you're already claiming that they know the "cold hard facts".

You already made up your mind what the truth is, and that "truth" is some big worldwide conspiracy.


And you can't see that you have a mental illness.

 

[MikeMike]

this is insanely funny pwnage of noto12ous

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious
As for popular mechanics...they don't address the molten steel issue. Read the article again.

so the steel was still liquid, weeks later? is that what you're saying? 3000 degrees for weeks?

That's what demolition crews have stated, along with fire fighters cleaning up at ground zero. Not just weeks, months

that is possibly the most ridiculous claim i have ever heard. if you're going to state something so outlandish you're going to need solid proof, not some random link of some random conspiracy theory website full of half quotes by made up people and 6 degrees of rumor.

Haha. You're a funny guy. You're going to be eating crow again.
Links have already posted in this thread, and other threads.

But, since I have a few minutes left:

"These candidly shaken macho guys recall scenes still haunting their nightmares two years after 9/11 - a 4-foot-high pile of bodies hurled from the towers, finding faces that were ripped from heads by the violence of the collapse, and heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel"

http://www.nypost.com/movies/19574.htm

Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel
http://www.jhsph.edu/Publications/Special/Welch.htm

As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running
http://www.seau.org/SEAUNews-2001-10.pdf

Greg Fuchek, vice president of sales for LinksPoint, Inc.-added that "sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel" (Walsh, 2002)
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/evidence/gcn_handheldapp.html

Smoke constantly poured from the peaks. One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3731/is_200112/ai_n9015802#continue

A veteran of disasters from the Mississippi floods Mt. St. Helens, Burger said it reminded him most of the volcano, if he forgot he was in downtown Manhattan. ?Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen?s and the thousands who fled that disaster,? he said
http://www.neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html

President of Controlled Demolition, MarkLoizeaux (as mentioned in the Loose Change 2nd Ed. Video) said that several weeks after 9/11, when the rubble was being removed, "hot spots of molten steel" were found "at the bottoms of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven [basement]levels"

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious
A puff of smoke rises...and is not considered debris. Debris (dark colored) actually falls off the right side of the building, downwards. I provided many links as evidence...go look at them again.

dense enough smoke certainly does go downward. ever seen a diesel truck take off from a stop?

additionally, THERE IS SOMETHING POURING OUT OF THE RIGHT SIDE OF THAT BUILDING AND GOING DOWNWARD FOR THE WHOLE GODDAMNED VIDEO. again, are you completely blind?

You seriously need to get some glasses...or a bigger monitor. Debris can clearly be seen falling downwards..off the right side of the building...at the speed of gravity...faster than the slow moving smoke

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtcshake.mpg

 

[MikeMike]

EVERY and i mean EVERY link you just posted, rapes your theory, and i mean RAPES your theory that thermite/explosives cause molten steel...

steel stays molten for a VERY short period.

what you have here is a case of FIRES causing STEEL to MELT. how hard is that to understand?

how long would explosions keep steel melted?

the answer: minutes. not weeks.

 

[noto12ious]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

I'm not saying that there have never been scams, political murders, etc, but when someone seems to get stuck on those ideas, they fit the profile of a schizophrenic.

That's your opinion. I look at them as realists who know the cold hard facts.

That's just it- I didn't even specify what the conspiracy theorists are crying conspiracy about, I just made a general statement that they're stuck on the idea that everything's a conspiracy. And yet you're already claiming that they know the "cold hard facts".

You already made up your mind what the truth is, and that "truth" is some big worldwide conspiracy.


And you can't see that you have a mental illness.

I was strictly referring to the quotes you brought up, ie "scams and coverups". There's noting wrong with pointing out the cold hard facts about issues like that.

World Wide conspiracy? I never mentioned anything about that. Try harder.

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: noto12ious

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: noto12ious
A puff of smoke rises...and is not considered debris. Debris (dark colored) actually falls off the right side of the building, downwards. I provided many links as evidence...go look at them again.

dense enough smoke certainly does go downward. ever seen a diesel truck take off from a stop?

additionally, THERE IS SOMETHING POURING OUT OF THE RIGHT SIDE OF THAT BUILDING AND GOING DOWNWARD FOR THE WHOLE GODDAMNED VIDEO. again, are you completely blind?

You seriously need to get some glasses...or a bigger monitor. Debris can clearly be seen falling downwards..off the right side of the building...at the speed of gravity...faster than the slow moving smoke

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtcshake.mpg

at the speed of gravity... you dont know physics do you.

NOTHING can fall at the speed of gravity... NOTHING. its physically impossible unless we are talking about an air free special tank...