Stop Loony Conspiracy Theories about 9/11 !!

[LA RAM FAN]

people like pred,the ones that are not paid agents on this forum like rat in the ass,they ditched junior high school science classes and clearly know nothing at all about the laws of physics.lol.

they dont get it that the lower you go,the thicker and heavier the steel columns are,that its impossible for a building to collapse because of a mere fire.lol because of that fact.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

 

[LA RAM FAN]

someone farted in here.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

someone farted in here.

Paid shills sent here to lie and derail government corruption truth discussions.

 

[eots]

There appears to be a lot of holes in the OFFICIAL account of those tragedies.

Beyond that simply observation, I really have no theories about the events.

Of course there are holes in it. That is to be expected when you have to piece together what happened after the fact and much of the evidence was destroyed in the explosion and collapse of the building. Even with it's holes and inconsistancies, it still fits what facts we DO know better than any other theory out there.

It's hilarious to me that so many truthers call the official report preposterous and then offer another theory that makes the official story look sane by comparison.

based on physics the official story is preposterous, however the use of explosives to create such a collapse is a well known fact...explosives are in fact the simplest explanation..if it was not it would not of taken NIST 8 YRS to create a highly questionable alternative explanation

 

[LA RAM FAN]

There appears to be a lot of holes in the OFFICIAL account of those tragedies.

Beyond that simply observation, I really have no theories about the events.

Of course there are holes in it. That is to be expected when you have to piece together what happened after the fact and much of the evidence was destroyed in the explosion and collapse of the building. Even with it's holes and inconsistancies, it still fits what facts we DO know better than any other theory out there.

It's hilarious to me that so many truthers call the official report preposterous and then offer another theory that makes the official story look sane by comparison.

based on physics the official story is preposterous, however the use of explosives to create such a collapse is a well known fact...explosives are in fact the simplest explanation..if it was not it would not of taken NIST 8 YRS to create a highly questionable alternative explanation

 

[SFC Ollie]

Still no proof of any explosives...............

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Someone farted in here.

 

[PredFan]

There appears to be a lot of holes in the OFFICIAL account of those tragedies.

Beyond that simply observation, I really have no theories about the events.

Of course there are holes in it. That is to be expected when you have to piece together what happened after the fact and much of the evidence was destroyed in the explosion and collapse of the building. Even with it's holes and inconsistancies, it still fits what facts we DO know better than any other theory out there.

It's hilarious to me that so many truthers call the official report preposterous and then offer another theory that makes the official story look sane by comparison.

Ya know I truly WANT to believe the official story.

Sadly I cannot.

Some of those holes are big enough to fly a 747 through, Pred.

What I think I know is this: we do not KNOW the truth.

We do not know the ABSOLUTE truth. However, the official story is as close to the truth as we will ever get and the stories proposed by the CT's are as far away from the truth as one can reasonably go.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

There appears to be a lot of holes in the OFFICIAL account of those tragedies.

Beyond that simply observation, I really have no theories about the events.

Of course there are holes in it. That is to be expected when you have to piece together what happened after the fact and much of the evidence was destroyed in the explosion and collapse of the building. Even with it's holes and inconsistancies, it still fits what facts we DO know better than any other theory out there.

It's hilarious to me that so many truthers call the official report preposterous and then offer another theory that makes the official story look sane by comparison.

based on physics the official story is preposterous, however the use of explosives to create such a collapse is a well known fact...explosives are in fact the simplest explanation..if it was not it would not of taken NIST 8 YRS to create a highly questionable alternative explanation

dont forget to mention as well the fact that many witnesses who heard explosions in the basements died in mysterious deaths as well and barry jennings dying was a major benefit to NIST since his testimony would have shreadded to pieces the lies of the NIST report when he talked about the bombs going off in bld 7 before the towers collapsed which shreads to pieces their lies the debris caused the damage to the towers or that one lady caller who went on alex jones show talking about hearing explosions going off in the basements and saying if she died,not to believe the official version,that she would never take her own life and then she dies being found hanging from the ceiling of her home.yep no conspiracy or coverup there.


Gomer ollie can only sling shit in defeat like the monket troll he is.his hanlders are going to have to think up something clever to get around this one.

 

[PredFan]

Why doesn't everybody just deal with the physics of skyscrapers?

Don't they have to get stronger and heavier toward the bottom?

So why aren't we told, and everyone expect to have accurate data, on the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level, including the basement levels?

It is about physics not conspiracies. There are more than 200 buildings around the world over 800 feet tall. Why should this be difficult?

Oh yeah, it recently occurred to me that 3D printers could be used to create scale models of each level of the WTC with spaces for metal weights to get the mass distribution correct. So computer control could create the necessary precision and still use a physical model to keep people from lying with computer equations, to test this collapse nonsense.

WTC Modeling Instruction & Testing in the Real World - YouTube

Of course if it does the same thing as my model then that might be embarrassing for some people.

psik

I believe they are stronger as they get closer to the bottom, but the accumulation of mass falling on it gets heavier and heavier as closer to the bottom it gets.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Of course there are holes in it. That is to be expected when you have to piece together what happened after the fact and much of the evidence was destroyed in the explosion and collapse of the building. Even with it's holes and inconsistancies, it still fits what facts we DO know better than any other theory out there.

It's hilarious to me that so many truthers call the official report preposterous and then offer another theory that makes the official story look sane by comparison.

Ya know I truly WANT to believe the official story.

Sadly I cannot.

Some of those holes are big enough to fly a 747 through, Pred.

What I think I know is this: we do not KNOW the truth.

We do not know the ABSOLUTE truth. However, the official story is as close to the truth as we will ever get and the stories proposed by the CT's are as far away from the truth as one can reasonably go.

and these people are all tim foil hatters according to gomer pyle ollie and predfan,they are all wrong and predfan and gomer are right and know what they are talking about.

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Why doesn't everybody just deal with the physics of skyscrapers?

Don't they have to get stronger and heavier toward the bottom?

So why aren't we told, and everyone expect to have accurate data, on the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level, including the basement levels?

It is about physics not conspiracies. There are more than 200 buildings around the world over 800 feet tall. Why should this be difficult?

Oh yeah, it recently occurred to me that 3D printers could be used to create scale models of each level of the WTC with spaces for metal weights to get the mass distribution correct. So computer control could create the necessary precision and still use a physical model to keep people from lying with computer equations, to test this collapse nonsense.

WTC Modeling Instruction & Testing in the Real World - YouTube

Of course if it does the same thing as my model then that might be embarrassing for some people.

psik

I believe they are stronger as they get closer to the bottom, but the accumulation of mass falling on it gets heavier and heavier as closer to the bottom it gets.

 

[PredFan]

There appears to be a lot of holes in the OFFICIAL account of those tragedies.

Beyond that simply observation, I really have no theories about the events.

Of course there are holes in it. That is to be expected when you have to piece together what happened after the fact and much of the evidence was destroyed in the explosion and collapse of the building. Even with it's holes and inconsistancies, it still fits what facts we DO know better than any other theory out there.

It's hilarious to me that so many truthers call the official report preposterous and then offer another theory that makes the official story look sane by comparison.

based on physics the official story is preposterous, however the use of explosives to create such a collapse is a well known fact...explosives are in fact the simplest explanation..if it was not it would not of taken NIST 8 YRS to create a highly questionable alternative explanation

That just simply isn't true. The collapse of the buildings does not defy physics.

If I'm to believe the controlled demolition theory, I'd have to believe that a crew of demolition experts riggedtwo skyscrapers to drop without ANYONE in the building knowing about it. Not the building supervisors, not the maintenance crew, not security, not any of the office workers, no one. AND I'd have to be made to believe that the demolition experts knew before hand EXACTLY where the planes would hit and drop the buildings from that exact spot. It's WAY more preposterous to believe that than it is to believe what I saw.

 

[numan]

That just simply isn't true. The collapse of the buildings does not defy physics.

Yes, it does.

If I'm to believe the controlled demolition theory, I'd have to believe that a crew of demolition experts riggedtwo skyscrapers to drop without ANYONE in the building knowing about it....It's WAY more preposterous to believe that than it is to believe what I saw.

What you saw was the mere surface which you were intended to see -- nothing more.

False Flag Attacks : 9/11

Bomb-sniffing dogs were inexplicably removed from the Twin Towers five days before 9-11....

Mechanical engineer Gordon Ross, in his talk on the destruction of the Twin Towers, pointed out that:

“Those [core] columns which were situated adjacent to and accessible from inside the elevator shafts failed at an early stage of the collapse.

"Those columns which were remote from the elevator shafts, and not accessible from the elevator shafts, survived the early stages of the collapse."

Indeed, a top demolition expert says that with access to the elevator shaft, a team of loading experts would have access to the columns and beams....

USA Today: Elevators were disaster within disaster

The World Trade Center had one of the world's great elevator systems — 198 of the biggest, fastest elevators ever built...

In a fire emergency, an elevator is programmed to return to its lowest floor and hold its doors open. On Sept. 11, many elevators far below the crash zones failed to do this, although they continued to have electrical power.

The doors of nearly 50 elevators in the north lobby alone were closed....Firefighters failed to inspect elevators with closed doors, even those closest to the command post in the north tower lobby....Elevator doors were nearly impossible to open unless a car was within 18 inches of a floor landing. Often, the elevator had to be within 3 inches of a landing before all door locking mechanisms would release. The twin towers had 15 miles of elevator shafts....

Door restrictors dropped a steel rod, like a deadbolt, into the mechanism that opened the elevator's doors. The lock was activated when a properly working elevator left a landing. If the elevator stopped suddenly or lost power, the restrictor made it impossible to open the inside door more than 4 inches. The lock could be released — and the doors opened fully — only from the elevator car's roof.

[emphases added]
.

 

[SFC Ollie]

And yet the Core columns stood up to about 60 stories until they couldn't support themselves......

 

[eots]

Of course there are holes in it. That is to be expected when you have to piece together what happened after the fact and much of the evidence was destroyed in the explosion and collapse of the building. Even with it's holes and inconsistancies, it still fits what facts we DO know better than any other theory out there.

It's hilarious to me that so many truthers call the official report preposterous and then offer another theory that makes the official story look sane by comparison.

based on physics the official story is preposterous, however the use of explosives to create such a collapse is a well known fact...explosives are in fact the simplest explanation..if it was not it would not of taken NIST 8 YRS to create a highly questionable alternative explanation

That just simply isn't true. The collapse of the buildings does not defy physics.

If I'm to believe the controlled demolition theory, I'd have to believe that a crew of demolition experts riggedtwo skyscrapers to drop without ANYONE in the building knowing about it. Not the building supervisors, not the maintenance crew, not security not any of the office workers, no one.

there was such activity noticed prior to 9/11

, AND I'd have to be made to believe that the demolition experts knew before hand EXACTLY where the planes would hit and drop the buildings from that exact spot. It's WAY more preposterous to believe that than it is to believe what I saw.

they planes may well of been flying themselves and modern demolition charges would not be set of by impact or fire several demolition experts have weighed in on this fact

 

[eots]

And yet the Core columns stood up to about 60 stories until they couldn't support themselves......

why could they not support themselves ??...and what happened to the rest of the core ?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Well obviously they didn't support themselves very long, but it proves there was no demo on the lower 60 stories of the core columns doesn't it...........The rest fell down....DUH......

 

[eots]

Well obviously they didn't support themselves very long, but it proves there was no demo on the lower 60 stories of the core columns doesn't it...........The rest fell down....DUH......

how so ?