Two New Yorkers who moved to my area saw explosions bring down World Trade Centers

[georgephillip]

Lol.......it's amazing how sheep like yourself are guilty of what you accuse others of but are too damn blind to see it.

You fail to make your case...which involves violating scientific principles...and it's MY fault?

The clownlite follows the basic rules for twoofers.

Make an outrageous claim and then demand the rest of us disprove it, all the while accusing anyone with logic to be an "apologist" or "bush dupe" or somesuch.

Kinda looks like we have a few new ones since I have been here to torment our resident twoofer brain trust.

So how did two planes pulverize three steel framed skyscrapers at nearly free fall speed?

 

[daveman]

Angular Momentum

When you start reading the materials people who disagree with you present, instead of ignoring them and shotgunning out your next talking point, then we can talk. Until then, you're not interested in debate.

Of course you're not...because you lost it long ago.

 

[daveman]

So how did two planes pulverize three steel framed skyscrapers at nearly free fall speed?

They didn't fall at nearly free-fall speed. That's been thoroughly debunked.

 

[slackjawed]

You fail to make your case...which involves violating scientific principles...and it's MY fault?

The clownlite follows the basic rules for twoofers.

Make an outrageous claim and then demand the rest of us disprove it, all the while accusing anyone with logic to be an "apologist" or "bush dupe" or somesuch.

Kinda looks like we have a few new ones since I have been here to torment our resident twoofer brain trust.

So how did two planes pulverize three steel framed skyscrapers at nearly free fall speed?

Two planes didn't "pulverize" anything dipshit, gravity did that after two planes weakened the structures, just like th eofficial reports say.


You have proven yourself to possess the rational logic skills of a turd........

 

[georgephillip]

Why would they? The path of least resistance was straight down. You know, the way gravity pulls.

Towers Collapse - Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and controlled demolition

​

You know, your path of least resistance would seem to go through the Towers' 47 steel core central columns that anchored each high-rise directly to bedrock? (Why Indeed...P.34)

Why don't you explain how this doesn't violate the laws of physics?

"It is physically impossible for a building (or anything else) to fall at near free-fall speed and do work (smashing steel and concrete) on the way down.

"An external energy input (like explosives) is absolutely essential. In addition, for the top of one of the towers to tip about 30 degrees and NOT continue tipping and falling off violates the law of conservation of angular momentum.

"The symmetrical collapse of building 7 due to highly asymmetrical damage is also unbelievable. We have not yet been told the truth...

"Why not a new and truly independent investigation?"

You Know?

We here at USMB have been down this path of logic before and the answer is the same as always.
We the taxpayers are perfectly happy with the investigation we have.
If you twoofers want a new investigation, then pay for it!
Take some of the money that is being made by selling books, pictures, fake building plans and radio shows and pay for a new investigation!


In case you havn't noticed, the country is having tough times, if you want a new investigation, pay for it.



>sits back and waits for the inevitable excuses as to why this is not possible<

Or we could tax the profits from the "War of Terror" that 9/11 made possible to pay for that new investigation.

PS: How much tax does someone living in a non-existent congressional district pay?

 

[georgephillip]

Angular Momentum

When you start reading the materials people who disagree with you present, instead of ignoring them and shotgunning out your next talking point, then we can talk. Until then, you're not interested in debate.

Of course you're not...because you lost it long ago.

When you show something worth reading.

 

[daveman]

Angular Momentum

When you start reading the materials people who disagree with you present, instead of ignoring them and shotgunning out your next talking point, then we can talk. Until then, you're not interested in debate.

Of course you're not...because you lost it long ago.

When you show something worth reading.

And of course, your standard for something worth reading is "anything that supports my delusions". No danger of having to rethink your conclusions if you never examine any contradictory information, is there?

Have a nice life in your little bubble, George. But I don't think that's possible.

 

[CurveLight]

When you start reading the materials people who disagree with you present, instead of ignoring them and shotgunning out your next talking point, then we can talk. Until then, you're not interested in debate.

Of course you're not...because you lost it long ago.

When you show something worth reading.

And of course, your standard for something worth reading is "anything that supports my delusions". No danger of having to rethink your conclusions if you never examine any contradictory information, is there?

Have a nice life in your little bubble, George. But I don't think that's possible.

Priceless irony.

 

[daveman]

When you show something worth reading.

And of course, your standard for something worth reading is "anything that supports my delusions". No danger of having to rethink your conclusions if you never examine any contradictory information, is there?

Have a nice life in your little bubble, George. But I don't think that's possible.

Priceless irony.

Actually, no, but I'm sure it comforts you to feel that way.

Physics, engineering, and thermodynamics trump angry anonymous internet retards. Every time.

 

[DiveCon]

And of course, your standard for something worth reading is "anything that supports my delusions". No danger of having to rethink your conclusions if you never examine any contradictory information, is there?

Have a nice life in your little bubble, George. But I don't think that's possible.

Priceless irony.

Actually, no, but I'm sure it comforts you to feel that way.

Physics, engineering, and thermodynamics trump angry anonymous internet retards. Every time.

and isnt it amazing how those that "claim" to be seeking the truth, have you lie and distort things to make it seem like its the truth

 

[daveman]

Priceless irony.

Actually, no, but I'm sure it comforts you to feel that way.

Physics, engineering, and thermodynamics trump angry anonymous internet retards. Every time.

and isnt it amazing how those that "claim" to be seeking the truth, have you lie and distort things to make it seem like its the truth

Indeed. Hey, Troofers: If you have to lie to make your point, your point isn't worth making.

 

[CurveLight]

Actually, no, but I'm sure it comforts you to feel that way.

Physics, engineering, and thermodynamics trump angry anonymous internet retards. Every time.

and isnt it amazing how those that "claim" to be seeking the truth, have you lie and distort things to make it seem like its the truth

Indeed. Hey, Troofers: If you have to lie to make your point, your point isn't worth making.

Your false accusations of lying fit your "internet retards" comment perfectly. It's amazing how you characterize yourself so clearly in trying to insult others.

 

[CurveLight]

The 9E Commission report gives the offical collapse time for the South Tower of ten seconds. What is the free fall speed on 110 story skyscraper?

 

[DiveCon]

The 9E Commission report gives the offical collapse time for the South Tower of ten seconds. What is the free fall speed on 110 story skyscraper?

i find it amazing that you cherry pick what you like from the 9/11 commission report and throw away the rest

 

[georgephillip]

So how did two planes pulverize three steel framed skyscrapers at nearly free fall speed?

They didn't fall at nearly free-fall speed. That's been thoroughly debunked.

The South Tower collapsed in 10 seconds.

That's a verifiable truth even Dick Cheney's pals on the 9/11 Commission couldn't lie about.

I'm sure you'll do better.

 

[CurveLight]

The 9E Commission report gives the offical collapse time for the South Tower of ten seconds. What is the free fall speed on 110 story skyscraper?

i find it amazing that you cherry pick what you like from the 9/11 commission report and throw away the rest

I'm not an engineer but I'm guessing that is not the time of the free fall speed
of a 110 story skyscraper.

 

[DiveCon]

The 9E Commission report gives the offical collapse time for the South Tower of ten seconds. What is the free fall speed on 110 story skyscraper?

i find it amazing that you cherry pick what you like from the 9/11 commission report and throw away the rest

I'm not an engineer but I'm guessing that is not the time of the free fall speed
of a 110 story skyscraper.

and you also ignore that it didnt all fall 110 stories
there was a huge pile of debris about 4 stories high
do you morons ever deduct THAT from your calculations?
i highly doubt it

 

[CurveLight]

So how did two planes pulverize three steel framed skyscrapers at nearly free fall speed?

They didn't fall at nearly free-fall speed. That's been thoroughly debunked.

The South Tower collapsed in 10 seconds.

That's a verifiable truth even Dick Cheney's pals on the 9/11 Commission couldn't lie about.

I'm sure you'll do better.

If ten seconds isn't "nearly free fall speed" then what would be? 8 seconds? 7 seconds? Hell, let's be generous and say the Commission is wrong and it was really 13 seconds. That would still be within the "nearly free fall" time frame, wouldn't it? It's amazing that so many ignore how many floors and steel support beams were still fully in tact below the impact points.

I wonder if demo teams have been overcharging on their fees? I mean if a simple plane crash on each one can bring 2 110 story buildings straight down then why do they charge so much and take so much time to do the same thing?

 

[CurveLight]

i find it amazing that you cherry pick what you like from the 9/11 commission report and throw away the rest

I'm not an engineer but I'm guessing that is not the time of the free fall speed
of a 110 story skyscraper.

and you also ignore that it didnt all fall 110 stories
there was a huge pile of debris about 4 stories high
do you morons ever deduct THAT from your calculations?
i highly doubt it

The CR said the collapse was ten seconds. Are you disputing that offical claim?

Also....are you saying the first four floors were still in tact so it's wrong to say a 110 story building collapsed? If not then you're agreeing all 110 stories collapsed.....but somehow....you think pointing to the pile of debris changes the collapse time?

(This post is an example of why divey usually posts nothing but ad homs because every single time he tries to debate he gets ***** slapped 8 ways from Sunday)

 

[DiveCon]

I'm not an engineer but I'm guessing that is not the time of the free fall speed
of a 110 story skyscraper.

and you also ignore that it didnt all fall 110 stories
there was a huge pile of debris about 4 stories high
do you morons ever deduct THAT from your calculations?
i highly doubt it

The CR said the collapse was ten seconds. Are you disputing that offical claim?

Also....are you saying the first four floors were still in tact so it's wrong to say a 110 story building collapsed? If not then you're agreeing all 110 stories collapsed.....but somehow....you think pointing to the pile of debris changes the collapse time?

(This post is an example of why divey usually posts nothing but ad homs because every single time he tries to debate he gets ***** slapped 8 ways from Sunday)

keep proving me right for calling you a ******* moron
LOL

and again, you dispute the 9/11 commission report, yet cite it as fact

LOL too ******* priceless