911NutPhysics.

[daws101]

Nutty 9-11 Physics

 

[eots]

Nutty 9-11 Physics

oh my. lots of physics in that... blog...lol

 

[daws101]

Nutty 9-11 Physics

oh my. lots of physics in that... blog...lol

you've once again proven how thick you really are!

 

[eots]

Nutty 9-11 Physics

oh my. lots of physics in that... blog...lol

you've once again proven how thick you really are!

are you trying to say this is anything more than editorial opinion ?

 

[daws101]

oh my. lots of physics in that... blog...lol

you've once again proven how thick you really are!

are you trying to say this is anything more than editorial opinion ?

read it and you decide..

 

[daws101]

Cause and Effect We live in a universe of patterns. Once a pattern is established, the burden of proof is on people who claim the pattern does not hold. When some philosopher of science points out that we cannot prove that the sun will rise tomorrow, I say he's absolutely right. There is no way to prove axiomatically that the sun will rise tomorrow, and nobody in science cares in the slightest. When the sun doesn't rise as scheduled, call me. Until then I absolutely refuse to waste time worrying about it. When Immanuel Velikovsky claimed the planets underwent wild disturbances in their orbits, the burden of proof was on him to show that it happened. The burden was not on scientists to show it didn't.
In the case of 9-11, we have planes hitting the World Trade Center and the buildings failing at precisely the level of impact. The observational evidence clearly shows a cause and effect relationship...

 

[eots]

Cause and Effect We live in a universe of patterns. Once a pattern is established, the burden of proof is on people who claim the pattern does not hold. When some philosopher of science points out that we cannot prove that the sun will rise tomorrow, I say he's absolutely right. There is no way to prove axiomatically that the sun will rise tomorrow, and nobody in science cares in the slightest. When the sun doesn't rise as scheduled, call me. Until then I absolutely refuse to waste time worrying about it. When Immanuel Velikovsky claimed the planets underwent wild disturbances in their orbits, the burden of proof was on him to show that it happened. The burden was not on scientists to show it didn't.
In the case of 9-11, we have planes hitting the World Trade Center and the buildings failing at precisely the level of impact. The observational evidence clearly shows a cause and effect relationship...

no plane hit wtc 7...in a murder investigation an investigator would not say...someone hit the person hours ago...so that is the conclusive cause of death

 

[daws101]

Cause and Effect We live in a universe of patterns. Once a pattern is established, the burden of proof is on people who claim the pattern does not hold. When some philosopher of science points out that we cannot prove that the sun will rise tomorrow, I say he's absolutely right. There is no way to prove axiomatically that the sun will rise tomorrow, and nobody in science cares in the slightest. When the sun doesn't rise as scheduled, call me. Until then I absolutely refuse to waste time worrying about it. When Immanuel Velikovsky claimed the planets underwent wild disturbances in their orbits, the burden of proof was on him to show that it happened. The burden was not on scientists to show it didn't.
In the case of 9-11, we have planes hitting the World Trade Center and the buildings failing at precisely the level of impact. The observational evidence clearly shows a cause and effect relationship...

no plane hit wtc 7...in a murder investigation an investigator would not say...someone hit the person hours ago...so that is the conclusive cause of death

no BUT THE DEBRIS FROM THE TOWERS DID...AND THEY WERE.......CAUSE AND EFFECT
AND NO AGAIN An inspector would say what was the cause of death...and then search for what hit that person...say a car hit the building the person was standing in and impacted the building with enough force to impale the person on their kitchen faucet. the car not the building is the cause of death
just as the planes hitting the twin towers were the ultimate cause of wtc7 collapse.

(cue buzzer)THANKS FOR PLAYING.

 

[eots]

Cause and Effect We live in a universe of patterns. Once a pattern is established, the burden of proof is on people who claim the pattern does not hold. When some philosopher of science points out that we cannot prove that the sun will rise tomorrow, I say he's absolutely right. There is no way to prove axiomatically that the sun will rise tomorrow, and nobody in science cares in the slightest. When the sun doesn't rise as scheduled, call me. Until then I absolutely refuse to waste time worrying about it. When Immanuel Velikovsky claimed the planets underwent wild disturbances in their orbits, the burden of proof was on him to show that it happened. The burden was not on scientists to show it didn't.
In the case of 9-11, we have planes hitting the World Trade Center and the buildings failing at precisely the level of impact. The observational evidence clearly shows a cause and effect relationship...

no plane hit wtc 7...in a murder investigation an investigator would not say...someone hit the person hours ago...so that is the conclusive cause of death

no BUT THE DEBRIS FROM THE TOWERS DID...AND THEY WERE.......CAUSE AND EFFECT
AND NO AGAIN An inspector would say what was the cause of death...and then search for what hit that person...say a car hit the building the person was standing in and impacted the building with enough force to impale the person on their kitchen faucet. the car not the building is the cause of death
just as the planes hitting the twin towers were the ultimate cause of wtc7 collapse.

(cue buzzer)THANKS FOR PLAYING.

but NIST determined damage from debris was not a significat factor in the collapse

 

[daws101]

no plane hit wtc 7...in a murder investigation an investigator would not say...someone hit the person hours ago...so that is the conclusive cause of death

no but the debris from the towers did...and they were.......cause and effect
and no again an inspector would say what was the cause of death...and then search for what hit that person...say a car hit the building the person was standing in and impacted the building with enough force to impale the person on their kitchen faucet. The car not the building is the cause of death
just as the planes hitting the twin towers were the ultimate cause of wtc7 collapse.

(cue buzzer)thanks for playing.

but nist determined damage from debris was not a significat factor in the collapse

yea and?

The debris damaged wtc7 enough to start fires.
The debris and the fires are linked to the twin towers collapse the twin towers are linked to the planes ... It's called the domino effect.

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7Nd7VS0z_k]Kiss - Domino (Alive III) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[daws101]

Kiss - Domino (Alive III) - YouTube

THEY SUCK what's your point?


Domino effectFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Domino Effect (disambiguation).

Domino effect events
(Top) Dominoes are standing. (Bottom) Dominoes are in motion.The domino effect is a chain reaction that occurs when a small change causes a similar change nearby, which then will cause another similar change, and so on in linear sequence. The term is best known as a mechanical effect, and is used as an analogy to a falling row of dominoes. It typically refers to a linked sequence of events where the time between successive events is relatively small. It can be used literally (an observed series of actual collisions) or metaphorically (causal linkages within systems such as global finance or politics).

 

[eots]

The Role of Assumptions in Scientific Investigation

http://genesismission.jpl.nasa.gov/educate/scimodule/Cosmogony/CosmogonyPDF/AppendixB.pdf

 

[Mr. Jones]

no plane hit wtc 7...in a murder investigation an investigator would not say...someone hit the person hours ago...so that is the conclusive cause of death

no BUT THE DEBRIS FROM THE TOWERS DID...AND THEY WERE.......CAUSE AND EFFECT
AND NO AGAIN An inspector would say what was the cause of death...and then search for what hit that person...say a car hit the building the person was standing in and impacted the building with enough force to impale the person on their kitchen faucet. the car not the building is the cause of death
just as the planes hitting the twin towers were the ultimate cause of wtc7 collapse.

(cue buzzer)THANKS FOR PLAYING.

but NIST determined damage from debris was not a significat factor in the collapse

This stupid fuck can't even use the quote functions, do you really expect him to be able to grasp that NIST actually said that?

 

[daws101]

The Role of Assumptions in Scientific Investigation

http://genesismission.jpl.nasa.gov/educate/scimodule/Cosmogony/CosmogonyPDF/AppendixB.pdf

all theories start with an assumtion, the difference is your has no basis in fact.

 

[eots]

 

[daws101]

Charlie Veitch Lego Tower | BBC 911 Conspiracy Road Trip - YouTube

Support Us Events Blogs Subscriptions Audio/Video Media Site
Eyewitness Reliability Questioned
The reliability of eyewitness testimony in criminal proceedings is being called into question in a number of jurisdictions across the United States, according to a story in the October issue of the ABA Journal, published by the American Bar Association.

According to the Journal article, several convictions have been overturned or are being reviewed in light of testimony from experts on the questionable reliability of eyewitness identifications.

Interest in revisiting eyewitness reliability can be attributed to the recent rash of exonerations based on DNA testing. Many of the convictions overturned in these cases were based on eyewitness identifications.

The Tennessee Supreme Court is expected to decide by early next year whether convicted robber Eddie L. Coley Jr., who is black and was convicted only on eyewitness identifications by two white clerks, should have been allowed to present expert testimony on the unreliability of eyewitness identifications when a victim of one race identifies a suspect of a different race.
In Georgia, the state Supreme Court is considering whether eyewitness expert testimony should be admitted in the robbery trial of Keith Johnson, whose accusers identified him from a photo lineup five months after the attack.
The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled in April that convicted rapist McKinley Cromedy was entitled to jury instruction on the dependability of cross-racial identification.
Similar rulings have been handed down this year in Utah and Massachusetts.
The Journal reports that many experts say that eyewitness reliability can be affected by factors such as race, stress, lighting, focus on weapons or other features instead of faces, the length of time a witness sees a suspect, and the length of time between the crime and the identification.

Source: News release, "ABA Journal: Eyewitness Reliability Called Into Question," American Bar Association, September 27, 1999.

For more on Government Issues:

Government Issues - Page 1 | National Center for Policy Analysis

 

[daws101]

FactsPlusLogic: The 9/11 Truther Laws of Nature

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Nutty 9-11 Physics

oh my. lots of physics in that... blog...lol

the kid troll obviously slept through junior high school science classes.the kid troll cant get around bld 7 and the witness testimony of barry jennings.he can only fling shit in defeat like the monkey he is so he is getting desperate now.lol.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvzrWo7i668&feature=player_embedded]911 Truther Fail - YouTube[/ame]