Obamerican
Senior Member
- Aug 21, 2010
- 1,732
- 136
- 48
It was on Vendeavor's post.
What the hell happened Truthers?
- Thread starter rightwinger
- Start date
Rat in the Hat
Gold Member
- Mar 31, 2010
- 21,949
- 6,021
- 198
Dr Wood's scientific background...
http://drjudywood.com/articles/a/bio/Wood_Bio.html
Unfortunately, I can't post the information on her breakdown & coma following an accident, as it was posted on the David Icke forum, and links to other forums are not allowed.
Last edited:
Vendeavor
Rookie
- Aug 25, 2011
- 13
- 5
- 1
From blog at http: //howitwasdone911. blogspot.com/
Sunday, April 25, 2010
To Understand 9/11, You Must Go Back and Make Sure You Know Some Stuff First
Outline:
1. Introduction - Why we need to know some stuff first before we can understand 9/11.
2. Nature of matter - How the World Trade Center (WTC) was destroyed.
3. Physical movement - How we know that no hijackings occurred on 9/11.
4. Chemical reactions - How we know that thermite did not destroy the WTC.
5. Nikola Tesla - The person discovered the technology used to destroy the WTC.
6. Human psychology - Why it is so difficult to explain 9/11 to people.
7. Conclusion - Why this is the most important subject on the planet.
1. Introduction
9/11 was a complicated crime. Nothing is going to change that. Most of us saw some things on TV that day that we had never seen before, so we didn't know what to think about it. Those who lived in the area of Ground Zero then witnessed long weeks and months of the aftermath. 9/11 didn't end on September 11, 2001, because Ground Zero kept fuming heavily for many weeks and months.
As an experienced laboratory scientist, I recognized when I had seen something unusual. So unusual, in fact, that I didn't know what it was. No scientist knows everything, but every scientist knows how to go about finding out answers to scientific questions, and I couldn't figure out what it was. What kind of weapon, exactly, can turn a building into dust and then continue to fume for months?
Right away I knew some things. I knew I was in a particular position to investigate 9/11, because not only did I live in lower Manhattan, but because I'm that type of person. I already knew that FOX News lies. I already knew about the deep corruption in our Corporatocracy we have in the US. I was already outside the mainstream.
These three things situated me in a unique position to discover the weapon used to destroy the WTC. First, I am a trained scientist. Second, I am outside the mainstream. Third, I was living in the vicinity of Ground Zero during the aftermath and became an unwilling witness and ultimately a victim of the attacks. Part of the World Trade Center is in my body right now, because I breathed all those fumes. I deserve to know what caused them, and nobody can convince me that airplanes and jet fuel was what I was smelling.
9/11 wasn't about me. I was and am a relatively unknown person. In fact, I knew that in all likelihood I was not going to be the one who discovered the weapon. But here's the deal: I know what a correct answer looks like, and I knew I could recognize the correct answer if it were ever told to me. The correct answer would account for the damage seen on 9/11 and the near-constant fuming from Ground Zero for months after. I am proud to say that in 2005, I found the person who discovered the weapon. Her name is Judy Wood.
2. The Nature of Matter
I'm going to keep this section simple. Matter is made up of molecules and molecules are made up of atoms. Atoms are made up of a very tiny nucleus (protons and neutrons) surrounded by an electron cloud. Molecules of a solid are very tightly packed in a relatively rigid formation. Molecules of a liquid are closely packed, but free to move around. Molecules of a gas are widely dispersed and bounce all around.
Explosives work in one way: a chemical reaction changes a solid into a gas, releasing energy in the form of heat and a physical blast wave that comes from the rapidly expanding gas. The hot gas continues to expand outwards in all directions until the pressure and temperature are in equilibrium with the environment.
The WTC was not brought down by explosives. We know this for two main reasons. First, the expanding dust cloud did not behave as if it were a gas. Instead, it behaved as if it were a colloidal suspension, and the dust bits fell to the ground. An explosive reaction (solid into gas) results in an approximately spherical-shaped expansion, which was not evident on 9/11. Instead, the dust poofed outwards and then fell to the ground like if you popped a balloon full of powder. POOF!
The second reason we know the WTC was not brought down by explosives is the fact that the dust cloud rolled over people and they survived. We know the temperature of the expanding dust cloud was not hot enough to kill or injure the folks on the street, therefore we know the dust cloud was not a result of an explosive.
Okay, so if not explosives, then what? Here's the answer: The molecules that made up the WTC were vibrated apart by electrical energy. That's it. Why did the buildings continue to fume for months after? Because the process is not self quenching. They had to remove the remains of the buildings before the fuming stopped at Ground Zero. The fuming that came from Ground Zero for months was the continuing molecular dissociation of the building materials. When they took away the last bits of the building, the fuming stopped, or almost stopped.
3. Physical movement
Part of the attacks of 9/11 was the cover story, so we need to understand a bit about the cover story. That whole thing about Osama bin Laden and the hijackers? Never happened. That whole thing about planes crashing into the World Trade Center? Never happened.
Momentum is conserved during every collision. That means that videos of a plane crashing into a building will show at least some pieces of the plane bouncing backwards in exactly the opposite direction. What we saw instead was the entire plane gliding smoothly into the building with no apparent damage, followed by explosions and stuff shooting out the other sides of the building. There wasn't any part of the plane that bounced off the south face of WTC 2, the supposed site of impact, which means there wasn't an impact.
For several years, people have claimed that all the videos were faked, that news editors and cameramen from all these different places altered their videos in exactly the same way. This is neither likely nor logical. What happened was that a 3-dimensional image of the plane was projected into the sky, and video cameras caught footage of this mysterious object passing into the WTC without damage. I'm not proving that no planes were hijacked on 9/11, I'm just telling you that none were. You can prove it to yourself by looking at the slow motion replay of the "plane crash". You won't find any bits of plane debris bouncing off the south face of WTC 2.
4. Chemical reactions
Getting quickly to the point, Steven Jones has been misleading us with his thermite theory. Thermite is an incendiary and not an explosive, which means it generates heat but not expansion of gas. People didn't die from the expanding dust cloud, therefore no type of incendiary could have been the cause of the destruction of the WTC. The only two people I'm willing to debate on this are Steven Jones himself or Niels Harrit, the primary author on that travesty of a paper, "Active Thermitic Material Found in World Trade Center Dust." Too many people have fallen in love with the thermite theory, despite its deep inadequacy as an explanation for 9/11.
5. Nikola Tesla
Nikola Tesla discovered a way to transmit electrical energy through the atmosphere, and even likely gave a demonstration of this technology, which resulted in the Tugunska disaster. Previously, he had caused a huge explosion with his experiments and had to relocate from Colorado to Long Island. He died penniless in Manhattan. There is so much about Tesla available for your own research, that I will say only one more thing. John Hutchison has been using electrical equipment to replicate Tesla's work since the late 1970's. You should check out his research, too.
6. Human psychology
Everyone remembers where they were on 9/11. We all have emotional "flash bulb memories" from that day, and the perpetrators of this crime took advantage of this by providing a cover story during that time. The hijacking story was the cover story, and this was cemented into our brains during a time of trauma.
Imagine if we had seen the buildings go POOF without the planes? We would have known right away that something very suspicious was afoot and start to search for enemies. The perpetrators provided us with the enemies almost immediately, so that instinct was squelched. We were bamboozled into thinking that a plane crash could take down a steel building, and we were bamboozled into believing that Osama bin Laden and 19 young Arabs committed the crime.
Secret technology was used. What were we supposed to "Never Forget"? Something almost none of us knew about at the time, and most of us still don't know about? Doesn't make sense to "Never Forget" something you never knew. And if you were like me, you didn't know what really happened on 9/11.
But that doesn't mean I'm wrong now. This isn't 2001. This is 2010. Almost nine long years have elapsed since the attacks of September 11, and we know more now than we did then.
7. Conclusion
Tesla was working on technology that could improve the lives of everyone on the planet. He knew that it could be used to destroy, and it was used to destroy the WTC. This was a terrible event, but we can turn it around. We can together continue to investigate this new technology, maybe even find out who used it against us and bring them to justice, but even more. We can use this energy to make our lives better, as Tesla originally intended. We can use a little bit of electrical energy to generate a large amount of physical energy, and we can transmit this energy to any location on the Earth. Pretty powerful and exciting, isn't it?
Sunday, April 25, 2010
To Understand 9/11, You Must Go Back and Make Sure You Know Some Stuff First
Outline:
1. Introduction - Why we need to know some stuff first before we can understand 9/11.
2. Nature of matter - How the World Trade Center (WTC) was destroyed.
3. Physical movement - How we know that no hijackings occurred on 9/11.
4. Chemical reactions - How we know that thermite did not destroy the WTC.
5. Nikola Tesla - The person discovered the technology used to destroy the WTC.
6. Human psychology - Why it is so difficult to explain 9/11 to people.
7. Conclusion - Why this is the most important subject on the planet.
1. Introduction
9/11 was a complicated crime. Nothing is going to change that. Most of us saw some things on TV that day that we had never seen before, so we didn't know what to think about it. Those who lived in the area of Ground Zero then witnessed long weeks and months of the aftermath. 9/11 didn't end on September 11, 2001, because Ground Zero kept fuming heavily for many weeks and months.
As an experienced laboratory scientist, I recognized when I had seen something unusual. So unusual, in fact, that I didn't know what it was. No scientist knows everything, but every scientist knows how to go about finding out answers to scientific questions, and I couldn't figure out what it was. What kind of weapon, exactly, can turn a building into dust and then continue to fume for months?
Right away I knew some things. I knew I was in a particular position to investigate 9/11, because not only did I live in lower Manhattan, but because I'm that type of person. I already knew that FOX News lies. I already knew about the deep corruption in our Corporatocracy we have in the US. I was already outside the mainstream.
These three things situated me in a unique position to discover the weapon used to destroy the WTC. First, I am a trained scientist. Second, I am outside the mainstream. Third, I was living in the vicinity of Ground Zero during the aftermath and became an unwilling witness and ultimately a victim of the attacks. Part of the World Trade Center is in my body right now, because I breathed all those fumes. I deserve to know what caused them, and nobody can convince me that airplanes and jet fuel was what I was smelling.
9/11 wasn't about me. I was and am a relatively unknown person. In fact, I knew that in all likelihood I was not going to be the one who discovered the weapon. But here's the deal: I know what a correct answer looks like, and I knew I could recognize the correct answer if it were ever told to me. The correct answer would account for the damage seen on 9/11 and the near-constant fuming from Ground Zero for months after. I am proud to say that in 2005, I found the person who discovered the weapon. Her name is Judy Wood.
2. The Nature of Matter
I'm going to keep this section simple. Matter is made up of molecules and molecules are made up of atoms. Atoms are made up of a very tiny nucleus (protons and neutrons) surrounded by an electron cloud. Molecules of a solid are very tightly packed in a relatively rigid formation. Molecules of a liquid are closely packed, but free to move around. Molecules of a gas are widely dispersed and bounce all around.
Explosives work in one way: a chemical reaction changes a solid into a gas, releasing energy in the form of heat and a physical blast wave that comes from the rapidly expanding gas. The hot gas continues to expand outwards in all directions until the pressure and temperature are in equilibrium with the environment.
The WTC was not brought down by explosives. We know this for two main reasons. First, the expanding dust cloud did not behave as if it were a gas. Instead, it behaved as if it were a colloidal suspension, and the dust bits fell to the ground. An explosive reaction (solid into gas) results in an approximately spherical-shaped expansion, which was not evident on 9/11. Instead, the dust poofed outwards and then fell to the ground like if you popped a balloon full of powder. POOF!
The second reason we know the WTC was not brought down by explosives is the fact that the dust cloud rolled over people and they survived. We know the temperature of the expanding dust cloud was not hot enough to kill or injure the folks on the street, therefore we know the dust cloud was not a result of an explosive.
Okay, so if not explosives, then what? Here's the answer: The molecules that made up the WTC were vibrated apart by electrical energy. That's it. Why did the buildings continue to fume for months after? Because the process is not self quenching. They had to remove the remains of the buildings before the fuming stopped at Ground Zero. The fuming that came from Ground Zero for months was the continuing molecular dissociation of the building materials. When they took away the last bits of the building, the fuming stopped, or almost stopped.
3. Physical movement
Part of the attacks of 9/11 was the cover story, so we need to understand a bit about the cover story. That whole thing about Osama bin Laden and the hijackers? Never happened. That whole thing about planes crashing into the World Trade Center? Never happened.
Momentum is conserved during every collision. That means that videos of a plane crashing into a building will show at least some pieces of the plane bouncing backwards in exactly the opposite direction. What we saw instead was the entire plane gliding smoothly into the building with no apparent damage, followed by explosions and stuff shooting out the other sides of the building. There wasn't any part of the plane that bounced off the south face of WTC 2, the supposed site of impact, which means there wasn't an impact.
For several years, people have claimed that all the videos were faked, that news editors and cameramen from all these different places altered their videos in exactly the same way. This is neither likely nor logical. What happened was that a 3-dimensional image of the plane was projected into the sky, and video cameras caught footage of this mysterious object passing into the WTC without damage. I'm not proving that no planes were hijacked on 9/11, I'm just telling you that none were. You can prove it to yourself by looking at the slow motion replay of the "plane crash". You won't find any bits of plane debris bouncing off the south face of WTC 2.
4. Chemical reactions
Getting quickly to the point, Steven Jones has been misleading us with his thermite theory. Thermite is an incendiary and not an explosive, which means it generates heat but not expansion of gas. People didn't die from the expanding dust cloud, therefore no type of incendiary could have been the cause of the destruction of the WTC. The only two people I'm willing to debate on this are Steven Jones himself or Niels Harrit, the primary author on that travesty of a paper, "Active Thermitic Material Found in World Trade Center Dust." Too many people have fallen in love with the thermite theory, despite its deep inadequacy as an explanation for 9/11.
5. Nikola Tesla
Nikola Tesla discovered a way to transmit electrical energy through the atmosphere, and even likely gave a demonstration of this technology, which resulted in the Tugunska disaster. Previously, he had caused a huge explosion with his experiments and had to relocate from Colorado to Long Island. He died penniless in Manhattan. There is so much about Tesla available for your own research, that I will say only one more thing. John Hutchison has been using electrical equipment to replicate Tesla's work since the late 1970's. You should check out his research, too.
6. Human psychology
Everyone remembers where they were on 9/11. We all have emotional "flash bulb memories" from that day, and the perpetrators of this crime took advantage of this by providing a cover story during that time. The hijacking story was the cover story, and this was cemented into our brains during a time of trauma.
Imagine if we had seen the buildings go POOF without the planes? We would have known right away that something very suspicious was afoot and start to search for enemies. The perpetrators provided us with the enemies almost immediately, so that instinct was squelched. We were bamboozled into thinking that a plane crash could take down a steel building, and we were bamboozled into believing that Osama bin Laden and 19 young Arabs committed the crime.
Secret technology was used. What were we supposed to "Never Forget"? Something almost none of us knew about at the time, and most of us still don't know about? Doesn't make sense to "Never Forget" something you never knew. And if you were like me, you didn't know what really happened on 9/11.
But that doesn't mean I'm wrong now. This isn't 2001. This is 2010. Almost nine long years have elapsed since the attacks of September 11, and we know more now than we did then.
7. Conclusion
Tesla was working on technology that could improve the lives of everyone on the planet. He knew that it could be used to destroy, and it was used to destroy the WTC. This was a terrible event, but we can turn it around. We can together continue to investigate this new technology, maybe even find out who used it against us and bring them to justice, but even more. We can use this energy to make our lives better, as Tesla originally intended. We can use a little bit of electrical energy to generate a large amount of physical energy, and we can transmit this energy to any location on the Earth. Pretty powerful and exciting, isn't it?
Please clarify...they have no evidence of what exactly??
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 298,369
- 223,123
- 3,615
- Thread starter
- #305
Given that truthers never provide an actual theory of what they think actually happened, they do not have to provide any evidence
It was a fuckin' riot. The wife had to kick me a couple o' times to get me to shut up. You know how headphones deaden your own sounds.I was laying in bed last night listening to Phil Hendrie on the radio. He took a break, so I moved the dial over and sure enough, on Coast to Coast AM, the twoofers were cackling like caged hens. One dude was trying so hard to make his loony case that he just about hyperventilated from talking so fast. The host had to cut him short out of fear he would die on the air......Talk about a comedic freak show.
you in your empy bed listening to coast to coast so you could laugh at twoofers sounds like a freak show alight...not sure if its funny however
Yeah, a comedic freak show it was.....Seriously, do you people realize just how ridiculous your bullshit sounds?
Just wondering what exactly is BS about-
The Destruction of the World Trade Center North Tower and Fundamental Physics, that show NIST is wrong?
Or studies like the The Missing Jolt: A Simple Refutation of the NIST-Bazant Collapse Hypothesis?
Or How NIST Avoided a Real Analysis of the Physical Evidence of WTC Steel?
You ridicule things that prove how ridiculous your ridiculing truly is
There's plenty of evidence that proves how wrong and implausible the NIST theory is, you people just simply ignore it, but believe what the government and it's agencies tell you even though they themselves have not provided scientific proof!
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 298,369
- 223,123
- 3,615
- Thread starter
- #308
Provide evidence of a controlled demo... How about all the people who have come forward in the last ten years telling How they were involved in wiring all those buildings or saw someone do it?
How about some evidence of a missile hitting the Pentagon or radar evidence that the actual plane went somewhere else?
How about evidence that no plane crashed in Shanksville? And evidence showing the actual plane going somewhere else
Should be easy
There's plenty of evidence that proves how wrong and implausible the NIST theory is...the collapse scenario that NIST tells us has been shown to be flawed. Let's deal with that first afterall the people who have pointed the flaws out are scientists, and mechanical engineers, and physicists, NOT Sherlock Holmes.
Your reasoning is to dismiss the scientific studies and calculations and laws of physics and dismiss them because
1-no one has come forward to confess about the plot
2-the other things such as flight 93-the pentagon plane , or who they "wired" the buildings have not been exposed
How exactly do those things discredit the real scientific facts that prove the impossibilities of the collapses?
The A&E folks and those that have done the scientific studies are not charged with figuring out HOW 19 Arabs with box cutters managed to circumvent security. They have however proven that the NIST explanations are BS.
Again how do you dismiss the scientific facts? How does not knowing exactly how they rigged the buildings, automatically compel you to dismiss the laws of physics?
Does NIST mention anything about the 19 Arabs and how EXACTLY they circumvented the NORAD defenses? NO! They were charged with the physics and science..and they were proven wrong.
How could the Manhattan Project that involved 130,000 people and cost 2 billion been kept secret for so long?
Your excuses and reasons are lame.
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 298,369
- 223,123
- 3,615
- Thread starter
- #310
I dont give a shit about NIST. I said you have no evidence to support your theory. Show me evidence of a controlled demo
Controlled Demolition Not Possible?
Debunking the Debunkers: Controlled Demolition Not Possible?
Why don't you try to prove your theory, instead of asking the same of others? You know how fire will destroy a massive building while making it appear to look like a CD?
Debunking the Debunkers: Controlled Demolition Not Possible?
Why don't you try to prove your theory, instead of asking the same of others? You know how fire will destroy a massive building while making it appear to look like a CD?
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 298,369
- 223,123
- 3,615
- Thread starter
- #313
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 298,369
- 223,123
- 3,615
- Thread starter
- #314
Controlled Demolition Not Possible?
Debunking the Debunkers: Controlled Demolition Not Possible?
Why don't you try to prove your theory, instead of asking the same of others? You know how fire will destroy a massive building while making it appear to look like a CD?
Trying to disprove someone elses theory does nothing to prove your theory
Provide evidence that a controlled demo was conducted.
SFC Ollie
Still Marching
Controlled Demolition Not Possible?
Debunking the Debunkers: Controlled Demolition Not Possible?
Why don't you try to prove your theory, instead of asking the same of others? You know how fire will destroy a massive building while making it appear to look like a CD?
Trying to disprove someone elses theory does nothing to prove your theory
Provide evidence that a controlled demo was conducted.
I keep asking them to simply tell us in their own words what their theories are. They won't even do that. Just that the only official investigations are wrong. I spell their names with a capitol L.
rightwinger
Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
- Aug 4, 2009
- 298,369
- 223,123
- 3,615
- Thread starter
- #316
Controlled Demolition Not Possible?
Debunking the Debunkers: Controlled Demolition Not Possible?
Why don't you try to prove your theory, instead of asking the same of others? You know how fire will destroy a massive building while making it appear to look like a CD?
Trying to disprove someone elses theory does nothing to prove your theory
Provide evidence that a controlled demo was conducted.
I keep asking them to simply tell us in their own words what their theories are. They won't even do that. Just that the only official investigations are wrong. I spell their names with a capitol L.
I will just have to conclude that there is no evidence to support any theory other than that of the official 9-11 commission
domonkoz
Member
- Sep 17, 2011
- 55
- 5
- 6
This is a controlled demolition cut. Also there was Thermite residue(compound used for controlled demolitions) dripping all over the cuts. Not to mention that it is scientifically impossible for jet fuel to melt steel under any circumstances.
The simple facts of temperatures:
* 1535ºC (2795ºF) - melting point of iron
* ~1510ºC (2750ºF) - melting point of typical structural steel
* ~825ºC (1517ºF) - maximum temperature of hydrocarbon fires burning in the atmosphere without pressurization or pre-heating (premixed fuel and air - blue flame)
Diffuse flames burn far cooler.
Oxygen-starved diffuse flames are cooler yet.
It is simply impossible for a hydrocarbon and office furnishings fire burning in air to melt steel, it just doesn't happen. Yet SOMETHING caused large quantities of molten iron and/or steel to accumulate in the basements of all three WTC buildings that collapsed to the ground and apparently some steel was even VAPORIZED that day.
Guess my only proof is scientific fact. Something Republicans don't believe in anyway.
Oh and lets just all forget that Tower 7 wasn't even hit! And it still fell down in about 3.2 seconds. Buildings a few hundred feet away were left without a scratch.
I think theres an overwhelming amount of evidence to support conspiracy. If there wasn't, then I'm sure the CIA would release the videos of the pentagon getting hit. Is it a matter of national security what the outside of the pentagon looks like? I think not.
Anyway you wouldn't beleive in this being an inside job if Cheney confessed on his deathbed they knew it was coming. You're mind is closed for business.
(pefect avatar btw, a mentally challenged manchild.)
Last edited:
daws101
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #318
hey mister dense...I know this is a tough concept for you ,so I'll make it as simple as I can..any opinion, extrapolation,of ANY 911 truth based organization is erroneous ,as it is based on a false and unprovable premise..
any study, report or opinion based on that premise is by definition false.
__________________
daws101
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #319
This is a controlled demolition cut. Also there was Thermite residue(compound used for controlled demolitions) dripping all over the cuts. Not to mention that it is scientifically impossible for jet fuel to melt steel under any circumstances.
The simple facts of temperatures:
* 1535ºC (2795ºF) - melting point of iron
* ~1510ºC (2750ºF) - melting point of typical structural steel
* ~825ºC (1517ºF) - maximum temperature of hydrocarbon fires burning in the atmosphere without pressurization or pre-heating (premixed fuel and air - blue flame)
Diffuse flames burn far cooler.
Oxygen-starved diffuse flames are cooler yet.
It is simply impossible for a hydrocarbon and office furnishings fire burning in air to melt steel, it just doesn't happen. Yet SOMETHING caused large quantities of molten iron and/or steel to accumulate in the basements of all three WTC buildings that collapsed to the ground and apparently some steel was even VAPORIZED that day.
Guess my only proof is scientific fact. Something Republicans don't believe in anyway.
Oh and lets just all forget that Tower 7 wasn't even hit! And it still fell down in about 3.2 seconds. Buildings a few hundred feet away were left without a scratch.
I think theres an overwhelming amount of evidence to support conspiracy. If there wasn't, then I'm sure the CIA would release the videos of the pentagon getting hit. Is it a matter of national security what the outside of the pentagon looks like? I think not.
Anyway you wouldn't beleive in this being an inside job if Cheney confessed on his deathbed they knew it was coming. You're mind is closed for business.
(pefect avatar btw, a mentally challenged manchild.)
oh fuck me! not this warmed over bullshit again.
eots
no fly list
controlled demolition not possible?
debunking the debunkers: Controlled demolition not possible?
why don't you try to prove your theory, instead of asking the same of others? You know how fire will destroy a massive building while making it appear to look like a cd?
trying to disprove someone elses theory does nothing to prove your theory
provide evidence that a controlled demo was conducted.
i keep asking them to simply tell us in their own words what their theories are. They won't even do that. Just that the only official investigations are wrong. I spell their names with a capitol l.
the "theory" is the 9/11 commission report and the nist report are cover ups and elements within the government most likely pLayed a role in events of 9/11 and the collapse of wtc 1-2 and 7
Last edited:
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
-
Trump is forcing the federal government to spell out everything that is a crime under federal law.- Started by excalibur
- Replies: 3
-
