Why don't people want to know the truth about 9/11?

[eots]

because it doesnt fit with their stupid meme

Same reason eots left out part of the Quintiere quote.

Same reason eots or anyone else won't address the .8 seconds of NON FREE FALL that preceded the 2.25 seconds of free fall.

yup
same reason he doesnt like it when i tell him that Dr Q called troofers "nutters" in an email reply to me

yet another lie...

 

[eots]

Still waiting for that quote from NIST that you say exists.

You know. The one where they said buildings of similar structural design caught fire and did not collapse?

I'll wait here for it.

it is in the opening statements of the wtc 7 final report

 

[DiveCon]

Same reason eots left out part of the Quintiere quote.

Same reason eots or anyone else won't address the .8 seconds of NON FREE FALL that preceded the 2.25 seconds of free fall.

yup
same reason he doesnt like it when i tell him that Dr Q called troofers "nutters" in an email reply to me

yet another lie...

nope, 100% true

 

[eots]

yup
same reason he doesnt like it when i tell him that Dr Q called troofers "nutters" in an email reply to me

yet another lie...

nope, 100% true

you are totally delusional....

 

[eots]

what kind of freak would tell you they have secret e-mails they cant post and expect to be believed...you are a clown

 

[DiveCon]

what kind of freak would tell you they have secret e-mails they cant post and expect to be believed...you are a clown

who said anything about secret or cant publish?
LOL
you are the delusional one
i said i WOULDNT post it, dipshit

 

[eots]

what kind of freak would tell you they have secret e-mails they cant post and expect to be believed...you are a clown

who said anything about secret or cant publish?
LOL
you are the delusional one
i said i WOULDNT post it, dipshit

because you couldn't...dipshit clown

 

[DiveCon]

what kind of freak would tell you they have secret e-mails they cant post and expect to be believed...you are a clown

who said anything about secret or cant publish?
LOL
you are the delusional one
i said i WOULDNT post it, dipshit

because you couldn't...dipshit clown

of course i could have, dipshit
i CHOOSE not to
because i know you would have only claimed it was fake anyway
ASSHOLE

 

[eots]

you are a fake...and a liar

 

[DiveCon]

you are a fake...and a liar

find his address, dipshit
and ask him yourself

 

[eots]

I CAN SEE IT NOW



DEAR DR DR Q..
My name is divecon
what do you think about TWOOFERS

DEAR DIVECON...I think they are nutters
sincerely DR Q

 

[eots]

This is funnier than when agent fizz claimed he met atta in a strip bar..

 

[DiveCon]

I CAN SEE IT NOW



DEAR DR DR Q..
My name is divecon
what do you think about TWOOFERS

DEAR DIVECON...I think they are nutters
sincerely DR Q

no, thats about what you would do
but why dont you try emailing him
his address is available

 

[x_anima]

At the top left corner there is 1 photo. 1+1=2

CAN YOU SEE THE PHOTO? CAN YOU COUNT TO TWO?

It has nothing to do with 1+1=2 pal, it has to do with you inserting only ONE PHOTO. Everyone else sees this but you?

Also, outlawing "conservatives" is the same as trying to outlaw "liberals" or "democrats" or "libertarians".. works both ways, and both ways are ignorant and stupid.

 

[BrianH]

EOTS why don't you go back to the link I posted and read a little more into, rather than spending five minutes looking at it. The dates to the right side of the page list NUMEROUS engineers and their findings about the falling of the towers and building seven. There are studies done by organizations and individuals.... And let's keep in mind that the hundreds of thousdans, if not millinos, of othe architects and engineers do not question the NIST, then it's more than likely they don't think it's a conspiracy.

nonsense

Says the guy that can't refute this....

Yo challenged me to find 10 because you assumed it couldn't be done. Now you up the number to 1400...typical. I think you refuse to believe otherwise...simple as that.

 

[eots]

eots why don't you go back to the link i posted and read a little more into, rather than spending five minutes looking at it. The dates to the right side of the page list numerous engineers and their findings about the falling of the towers and building seven. There are studies done by organizations and individuals.... And let's keep in mind that the hundreds of thousdans, if not millinos, of othe architects and engineers do not question the nist, then it's more than likely they don't think it's a conspiracy.

nonsense

says the guy that can't refute this....

Yo challenged me to find 10 because you assumed it couldn't be done. Now you up the number to 1400...typical. I think you refuse to believe otherwise...simple as that.

no you might find ten...but you cant just post a statement from a large and somewhat generic groups and pretend all of its members sign off on it...it is nothing like individual engineers going on record with their individual opinion and the reasons for their conclusions

 

[BrianH]

nonsense

says the guy that can't refute this....

Yo challenged me to find 10 because you assumed it couldn't be done. Now you up the number to 1400...typical. I think you refuse to believe otherwise...simple as that.

no you might find ten...but you cant just post a statement from a large and somewhat generic groups and pretend all of its members sign off on it...it is nothing like individual engineers going on record with their individual opinion and the reasons for their conclusions

There's no reason for them to. That's the nature of what you are talking about. The only reason conspiracist are known is because they disagree with the NORM.

You're not going to see individual statements from each and every civil and structural engineer in the field because most of them agree as to why the towers fell. All of the sane engineers in the field aren't going to start their own individual websites explaining why the NIST report was accurate. The NIST report said what needed to be said. There's no sense explaining it two, three, or 10 million times over. I'm not claiming that they did a "bang-up" job on it or weren't 100% accurate, but obviously more engineers than not feel that it is possilbe that the towers and building 7 fell from the conditions present... OTHERWISE, you would have a national movement of the majority of engineers wanting truth...which is not the case. You have 1400 out of 10 million that are questioning it. And let's not also forget to mention that some of those 1400 are not even from the U.S. You're comparing apples to oranges in this respect. The only reason you can find 1400 9/11 "truth" sites is because every moron who wants to disagree feels he or she has to make a statement about it and stack boxes up and explain why it's not possible to have happened... You have the burden of proof because you're trying to disagree with the majority of engineers. For some odd reason, you believe that because 1400 engineers from around the world have signed some petition, and that the other 10 million haven't signed a petition of support of the NIST, then that makes you right...

 

[BrianH]

http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf

Read this whole page....
Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - World Trade Center 7, Building 7

They use the turm "Pull" to describe actually pulling the building away from other buildings so that it doesn't fall a certian direction. This is also illustrated with actual pictures of the cables being used to pull building 6.

Also, it talks about Silverstein's comments to the fire commander about "pulling" building seven. Neither of the two men in the conversation are in the demolition business. The term "pull" in the firefighting community is to literally PULL men from the building. Read the entire page on the site above and notice the HOLES in the conspiracy movement. These modern conspiracist strategically leave out bits and pieces of video and evidence because it will prove them wrong.

 

[DiveCon]

nonsense

says the guy that can't refute this....

Yo challenged me to find 10 because you assumed it couldn't be done. Now you up the number to 1400...typical. I think you refuse to believe otherwise...simple as that.

no you might find ten...but you cant just post a statement from a large and somewhat generic groups and pretend all of its members sign off on it...it is nothing like individual engineers going on record with their individual opinion and the reasons for their conclusions

why not? you do

 

[BrianH]

Here's a tenative re-enactment of the particular manner in which EOTS debates.

EOTS: 9/11 was a government conspiracy.

Poster: Why do you think that?

EOTS: Here's the evidence. (Youtube video)(Individual website)(etc...)

Poster: Well here's some evidence that refutes your evidence (credible website)

EOTS: No it doesn't. Nonsense

Poster: Did you even look at the site?

EOTS: The guy that posted that doesn't even work there anymore so he's not credible.

Poster: Well how about these guys? (Other credible websites)

EOTS: That's not a credible source.

And it goes on and on.

It seems to me EOTS that you are willing to discredit any person, place, or thing that has any type of character flaw whatsover. You constantly discredit other people's "evidence" while ensuring that the chopped up and edited videos you post from youtube are the "say-all, end-all" of the discussion. You post evidence first, then it gets refuted by evidence from someone else, then you don't respond with more evidence, but discredit where they got the evidence. You challenge people to go on goose chases to find things that you believe don't exist, and then ignore the challenge when those very same people actually succeed.

You have yet to prove this is a conspiracy Eots, and the only one who is posting discredible information is you. These conspiracy videos leave out ALOT of video that would, otherwise, go against what the conspirator was trying to accomplish in the first place. I think you really need to research your own movement before assuming that this was an inside job...which is obviously not the common implication among the majority of engineers and architects. (Shown by the site I posted as well as common sense)