9-11 polls and scientists doubts

[Freeman]

One reason why it is irrational to keep believing the Bush-Cheney conspiracy theory, without being willing to look at new evidence, is that there are now grounds for being skeptical of that theory that did not exist at the time this theory became imprinted on most minds.

A few years ago, some scientists formed the Scientific Panel for the Investigation of 9/11. Others, more recently, formed Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, the main work of which has been carried out by physicists and chemists

That was true in 2005. The following year, however, architect Richard Gage formed Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and by now over 600 licensed architects and engineers have signed its petition calling for a new investigation. These are people who know about that part of the real world that consists of steel-frame high-rise buildings, and they know that the official story---according to which fires caused the Twin Towers and Building 7 to come straight down in virtual free fall---simply cannot be true. For example, Jack Keller, emeritus professor of engineering at Utah State University, who had been given special recognition by Scientific American, has said about the collapse of Building 7: “Obviously it was the result of controlled demolition.” A similar judgment has been offered by two emeritus professors of structural engineering at Switzerland’s Federal Institute of Technology, along with hundreds of other engineers and architects.

Over the past year, scientists affiliated with Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice have published 3 papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals. The lead author of the most recent of these papers, which appeared in the Open Chemical Physics Journal, is Niels Harrit, a chemistry professor at the University of Copenhagen. These scientists, who know something about the chemical constituents of the real world, report finding many elements in World Trade Center dust that should not be there if the official theory, according to which nothing but fire and gravity brought the buildings down, were true.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy1oPmuZZ98&feature=related]YouTube - Thermite Scientifically Confirmed in 911[/ame]

 

[Godboy]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHZtiPlreMc]YouTube - Important message from Dana White[/ame]

 

[Godboy]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ]YouTube - The Office- Michael Scott No God No[/ame]

 

[Mad Scientist]

Well I for one am convinced!

 

[Freeman]

Why this published scinetific study was censored in US media?!
very interestiing
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o]YouTube - A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles )[/ame]

 

[Godboy]

Why this published scinetific study was censored in US media?!
very interestiing
YouTube - A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles )

Um i dont know, maybe because hes a fucking crackpot? Theres a big difference between censoring and simply ignoring buffoons.

 

[Charles_Main]

Why this published scinetific study was censored in US media?!
very interestiing
YouTube - A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles )

Um i dont know, maybe because hes a fucking crackpot? Theres a big difference between censoring and simply ignoring buffoons.

Liberals often have a hard time with the meanings of words.

The also have a hard time understanding the just because someone is called a scientist does not mean they can't be a total idiot and a lying crack pot.

 

[DiveCon]

Why this published scinetific study was censored in US media?!
very interestiing
YouTube - A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles )

Um i dont know, maybe because hes a fucking crackpot? Theres a big difference between censoring and simply ignoring buffoons.

Liberals often have a hard time with the meanings of words.

The also have a hard time understanding the just because someone is called a scientist does not mean they can't be a total idiot and a lying crack pot.

in all honesty, most of the "liberal" troofers stopped asking these questions once Bush was out of office
i chalk this one up to just plain INSANE

 

[Charles_Main]

Um i dont know, maybe because hes a fucking crackpot? Theres a big difference between censoring and simply ignoring buffoons.

Liberals often have a hard time with the meanings of words.

The also have a hard time understanding the just because someone is called a scientist does not mean they can't be a total idiot and a lying crack pot.

in all honesty, most of the "liberal" troofers stopped asking these questions once Bush was out of office
i chalk this one up to just plain INSANE

Yeah that might very well be the most damming evidence of just how Bogus their claims all were. As soon as they got rid of Bush they shut up about them. Was nothing but a tool to demonize their opponents. Period.

 

[saveliberty]

Had to go all the way to Russia for the poll numbers huh? I always find it interesting that someone will put their complete faith and trust in someone they have never met and most likely don't have their best interests at heart, while completely ignoring things like over 50 independent shots of jet airplanes flying into the World Trade Center.

 

[eots]

Liberals often have a hard time with the meanings of words.

The also have a hard time understanding the just because someone is called a scientist does not mean they can't be a total idiot and a lying crack pot.

in all honesty, most of the "liberal" troofers stopped asking these questions once Bush was out of office
i chalk this one up to just plain INSANE

Yeah that might very well be the most damming evidence of just how Bogus their claims all were. As soon as they got rid of Bush they shut up about them. Was nothing but a tool to demonize their opponents. Period.

you have no clue..

 

[eots]

Had to go all the way to Russia for the poll numbers huh? I always find it interesting that someone will put their complete faith and trust in someone they have never met and most likely don't have their best interests at heart, while completely ignoring things like over 50 independent shots of jet airplanes fly into the World Trade Center.

who said a plane didn't hit the building ..buffoon

 

[saveliberty]

Had to go all the way to Russia for the poll numbers huh? I always find it interesting that someone will put their complete faith and trust in someone they have never met and most likely don't have their best interests at heart, while completely ignoring things like over 50 independent shots of jet airplanes fly into the World Trade Center.

who said a plane didn't hit the building ..buffoon

Your with conspiracy boy and I'm the buffoon..right.

Guess what we learned at the World Trade Center? That structural steel can be deformed under the stress of a large building and copious amount of jet fuel.

 

[candycorn]

Had to go all the way to Russia for the poll numbers huh? I always find it interesting that someone will put their complete faith and trust in someone they have never met and most likely don't have their best interests at heart, while completely ignoring things like over 50 independent shots of jet airplanes fly into the World Trade Center.

who said a plane didn't hit the building ..buffoon

Your with conspiracy boy and I'm the buffoon..right.

Guess what we learned at the World Trade Center? That structural steel can be deformed under the stress of a large building and copious amount of jet fuel.

Nobody has ever said why they needed airplanes if they had thermite and vice versa.

 

[saveliberty]

who said a plane didn't hit the building ..buffoon

Your with conspiracy boy and I'm the buffoon..right.

Guess what we learned at the World Trade Center? That structural steel can be deformed under the stress of a large building and copious amount of jet fuel.

Nobody has ever said why they needed airplanes if they had thermite and vice versa.

It was a distraction while the CIA ran thermite up 120 floors in clown outfits.

 

[candycorn]

Your with conspiracy boy and I'm the buffoon..right.

Guess what we learned at the World Trade Center? That structural steel can be deformed under the stress of a large building and copious amount of jet fuel.

Nobody has ever said why they needed airplanes if they had thermite and vice versa.

It was a distraction while the CIA ran thermite up 120 floors in clown outfits.

It was only 110 floors; get it straight!

 

[saveliberty]

Nobody has ever said why they needed airplanes if they had thermite and vice versa.

It was a distraction while the CIA ran thermite up 120 floors in clown outfits.

It was only 110 floors; get it straight!

Legends are always growing.