Conspiracy Theory

[nanook 1]

Quote

these are obviously well thought out, educated comments, that bring clarity and substance to the debate. it quite obvious that you lot have a deeper understanding of what went on than me...

Now you're getting it.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

these are obviously well thought out, educated comments, that bring clarity and substance to the debate. it quite obvious that you lot have a deeper understanding of what went on than me...

Now you're getting it.

No he's not.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rhys 0]

Quote

Every month or two you insisted on resurrecting this discussion. Eventually everyone realized what a huge waste of time it was debating reality with you, so we're just going to have fun instead.

Actually it was speedracer that bought it up, i am marely pointing out how short sighted and ill informed you lot are.

If you are so sure you are right and I am a fool, read the post above you last, and explain how it is possible for the initiating floors to 'freefall' 3.7m, to begin the collapse sequence, as was reported in NIST's hypothesis, and all the debunking thoeries.

This has not been answered by any of you, or anyone. I keep asking but the point keeps getting clouded by immature batman and robbin/tin foil remarks.

If you are happy to beleive 3.7 metres of steel and concrete structure can simply dissapear, just because some extremely well paid scientists tell you so, then you are a fool!

Because that is what you are believing, and preaching as truth.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

:
In Reply To
In Reply To
yes, the similarity is that both sets are intellectually vacant. Both hold their beliefs based on faith, because facts aren't important or helpful to the belief.

you realise what you are saying don't you!

You are actually agreeing with me!

Wow!

sorry to disappoint you - I had just been running in the heat for the prior hour and the phrasing gave you false hope.

I'm describing creationists/ID people along with 9/11 tinhatters.

Don't pass the buck, you mis-read what I had wrote, was obviously not observant enough to see what it was you were responding to, and basically mocked youself and all you mates here.

The same mistake has been made by all of you for not seeing the 'freefall of 3.7m by the top 10% of the building' as reported by NIST, but I very much doubt any of you have actually read the report!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

If you are so sure you are right and I am a fool, read the post above you last, and explain how it is possible for the initiating floors to 'freefall' 3.7m, to begin the collapse sequence, as was reported in NIST's hypothesis, and all the debunking thoeries.

It has been answered and the issue has been beat to death. You just choose to ignore what they tell you because it goes against your theory.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[rhys 0]

Quote

It has been answered and the issue has been beat to death. You just choose to ignore what they tell you because it goes against your theory.

Listen Rookie, I don't even expect you to show me where it has been beaten to death, but enlighten me as to where it has been explained that the top section of the buildings could 'freefall' 3.7 metres.

You actually realise what is being said don't you?

I bet you all failed debate at school, you would be laughed at bringing hearsay into a real debate, so sherlock, I have given evidence and substance, where is yours?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

I have given evidence and substance, where is yours?

You have given shit! All you do is deny and distract. So my ears are open. What happened to the 3.7 meter? Tell me how they got explisives up there without nobody knowing about it, how they ran the blasting caps and all that crap and how all that stuff still worked even after a plane slammed into it. You have never told us how that happened. So come on! I'm listening! And if you link the video of "Loose Change" whatever version they are up to now because they keep changing there story I am gonna be really disappointed.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

but enlighten me as to where it has been explained that the top section of the buildings could 'freefall' 3.7 metres.

From YOUR post in the "Loose Screws Change" thread you started:

Quote

All collapsing through the path of the highest resistance and at free fall speeds.

Isn't that YOUR "experts" saying the building was free falling? Shall I look up all the REST of the posts where you were insisting it was a demo event because of EXACTLY that reason?

Quote

I bet you all failed debate at school, you would be laughed at bringing hearsay into a real debate, so sherlock, I have given evidence and substance, where is yours?

ALL you've brought is hearsay, or whatever the chief 'troofer' is spewing from his ass THIS week.... "Sherlock".

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rhys 0]

Quote

:
In Reply To
but enlighten me as to where it has been explained that the top section of the buildings could 'freefall' 3.7 metres.

From YOUR post in the "Loose Screws Change" thread you started:

Quote
All collapsing through the path of the highest resistance and at free fall speeds.

Isn't that YOUR "experts" saying the building was free falling? Shall I look up all the REST of the posts where you were insisting it was a demo event because of EXACTLY that reason?

For fucks sake, no wonder you are having a hard time grasping this, you really do not understand do you.

let me help you;

The building fell at free fall speed, we all saw that many times over.

The Nist report states this was 'due to the initial floors collapsing at free fall speed' and sending the energy through the buildings creating the collapse at this speed.

There is no question that the buildings fell damned fast and they(nist) had to conjure up a theory to support that fact as we all wintnessed in real time the collapses of all 3 buildings.

At least fema had the gumtion to say they couldn't explain the rate of the collapses. Nist conjured up some false physics and surronded it with fancy mathmatics to fool all you speed readers.

Quote

ALL you've brought is hearsay, or whatever the chief 'troofer' is spewing from his ass THIS week.... "Sherlock".

Actually i base my assertins on my own study of all aspects of this incident, you quite clearly don't have the intelect to understand what it is that is being said!

I challenge you to show me where my case and point of the initiating forces, as reported by your side of the story, has been explained in real terms using real life physics.

But you probably can't fathom what it is I am saying and will return to calling me a radiophobic, and declare to yourself that you have won the debate!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Nist conjured up some false physics and surronded it with fancy mathmatics to fool all you speed readers.

As opposed to pipe-dream conspiracy fantasies about wiring a 90+ floor of a skyscraper for demolition without ONE SINGLE SOUL seeing it or talking about it in 8 years.

Quote

Actually i base my assertins on my own study of all aspects of this incident, you quite clearly don't have the intelect to understand what it is that is being said!

Nice PA there, Skippy - next time, use that vaunted intellect of yours to spell-check. You might want to come up with some "study" that doesn't involve a cut-n-paste from the bullshitter-in-chief, as well.

Quote

I challenge you to show me where my case and point of the initiating forces, as reported by your side of the story, has been explained in real terms using real life physics.

Here's a better challenge - prove the buildings were wired for demo like YOU were challenged to do YEARS ago.

Quote

But you probably can't fathom what it is I am saying and will return to calling me a radiophobic, and declare to yourself that you have won the debate!

No, actually I quite pity you.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rhys 0]

Quote

Nice PA there, Skippy - next time, use that vaunted intellect of yours to come up with some "study" that doesn't involve a cut-n-paste from the bullshitter-in-chief.

So you would rather try to change the focus of the conversation than actually substanciate what you are saying? (fuck knows where you 'skippy' from but who cares)

Nice one!

Quote

:
As opposed to pipe-dream conspiracy fantasies about wiring a 90+ floor of a skyscraper for demolition without ONE SINGLE SOUL seeing it or talking about it in 8 years.

Um, No, as in a national body representing science and technology, lying and using false physics at the expense of the worlds understanding of what actually went on that day.

Quote

Nice PA there, Skippy

Well you clearly expressed your inability to understand what it is that I was saying. That clearly shows a lack of intellect.

Quote

Here's a better challenge - prove the buildings were wired for demo like YOU were challenged to do YEARS ago.

I am not a scientist or a demolition expert and I am also not a dectective, you are asking more than what my current ablities allow me to realisticly do, I however asked you (or anyone reading for that matter) to inform me why you are so certain that what you have been told is the truth when it clearly is not, as I pointed out in my earlier post/s.

Quote

No, actually I quite pity you.

Why because you have blown my side of the story away with you great, detailed, scientificly backed contibutions to the debate?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

:
As opposed to pipe-dream conspiracy fantasies about wiring a 90+ floor of a skyscraper for demolition without ONE SINGLE SOUL seeing it or talking about it in 8 years.

Um, No, as in a national body representing science and technology, lying and using false physics at the expense of the worlds understanding of what actually went on that day.

Two words: PROVE IT

Quote

Here's a better challenge - prove the buildings were wired for demo like YOU were challenged to do YEARS ago.

I am not a scientist or a demolition expert and i am also not a dectective, you are asking more than what my current ablities allow me to realisticly do,

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

What have YOU contributed, besides hearsay and drug-dream conspiracy theories?

YOU are the one trying to convince people - the burden of proof is therefore upon YOU.

PROVE that the buildings were wired for demo.

PROVE how those building were wired up in such a way as to cause the collapse, WITHOUT being affected by the impact of the plane, the explosion of the fuel or the following fire.

PROVE to me that those novice pilots had the skill to put heavy jets into EXACTLY the right floors and miss those explosives.

EXPLAIN how all the people that would have been involved have NEVER talked.

EXPLAIN how all the survivors missed seeing thousands of pounds of explosives.

EXPLAIN how all the survivors missed seeing partly demolished walls so that the demo crew could get at the supporting beams.

EXPLAIN how all the survivors missed seeing the miles and miles of wiring that would be involved in a project that size.

EXPLAIN how all the survivors missed seeing the hundreds of people it would take to do the project over the course of months it would take to complete it.

Because two kids made a video and said so!

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[grimmie 186]

I'm still waiting for my phone to ring. Just what I thought. Too chicken to debate the facts in person...

[rhys 0]

Quote

Two words: PROVE IT

Quote

PROVE that the buildings were wired for demo.

If you hadn't noticed, obviously you havn't, all i am saying in this conversation is that the official report is wrong.

Here is a short and sweet explanation of what I am trying to say, with not too many big words for you big head to comprehend;

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3884745/911-Sudden-collapse-initiation-impossible

I hope it is not too much for your short attention span.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

I'm still waiting for my phone to ring. Just what I thought. Too chicken to debate the facts in person...

You never gave me your number.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[rhys 0]

Quote

Because two kids made a video and said so!Tongue

Hey rookie guy, you're obviously new to this, if loose change is your only concept on this, i suggest you go do some research before you make any more comments.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

all i am saying in this conversation is that the official report is wrong.

If you know it's wrong then what is the correct answer?

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

with not too many big words for you big head to comprehend;



I hope it is not too much for your short attention span.

While I may disagree with some of his analyses, Mike's not dumb. If you're trying to argue for a position, insulting the other side is very rarely an effective tactic unless you want to appeal to your own side. (Doesn't mean it's not one used frequently.)

And it would be a very hard case to argue that his attention span is short.

Whether his head has an above average circumferance seems fairly easy to find out.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

Hey rookie guy, you're obviously new to this,

New? No I work with a conspiracy nut just like you so I get to listen to this shit all the time.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

with not too many big words for you big head to comprehend;



I hope it is not too much for your short attention span.

While I may disagree with some of his analyses, Mike's not dumb. If you're trying to argue for a position, insulting the other side is very rarely an effective tactic unless you want to appeal to your own side. (Doesn't mean it's not one used frequently.)

And it would be a very hard case to argue that his attention span is short.

Whether his head has an above average circumferance seems fairly easy to find out.

/Marg

My wear a 7 5/8 to 7 3/4 hat, depending on make...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I'm still waiting for my phone to ring. Just what I thought. Too chicken to debate the facts in person...

I think you're confusing Rookie with rhys, aren't you?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

If you hadn't noticed, obviously you havn't, all i am saying in this conversation is that the official report is wrong.

In short, like every other CT crackpot, you're claiming that something looks funny, therefore the whole thing is a lie. Pretty much the OJ defense - 'if the glove don't fit, you must acquit!'

It's much easier to point to something difficult to explain (and refuse to accept any explanations for it), then to support your counter proposal of how it went down. Because 'mission impossible' doesn't even come close to describing how difficult it would be to blow up these buildings intentionally without detection.

[grimmie 186]

Quote

Quote

I'm still waiting for my phone to ring. Just what I thought. Too chicken to debate the facts in person...

I think you're confusing Rookie with rhys, aren't you?

Nope. I was just letting him, and you guys know that rhys still hasn't phoned me to discuss the issues.

[rhys 0]

Quote

If you know it's wrong then what is the correct answer?

Are you serious?

Nist spends millions of dollars getting it wrong (whether by accident or on purpose?) and you expect a comercial skydiver to explain it to you?



Are you stupid or what?

To answer your quetion, one would need millions of dollars, many scientists, access to the evidence, and most importantly the acceptance from the authorites.

over 70,000 people from New York state just petitioned to have a new non biased investigation.

hundreds or thousands of scientists from around the world also want the same and will participate in the investigation. Those that have put forward hypothesies of the cause have been called whackjobs by uneducated, ill informed poeple that can't grasp what it is they are talking about but simply enjoy belittleing people for the fun of it.

And you want me to give you an/my explanation?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix