Has Anyone Seen A Realistice Explanation For Free Fall Of The Towers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
gwb is a puppet. I sue puppeteers if anyone.

What is hilarious is that you actually think this nation has courts of law. So far, I've not seen that in many years of failing lawsuits.

Law has one purpose, to protect life with reason. Our courts here are not measuring up.

Puppeteers? So what? It would be a good start, wouldn´t it?
 
Concrete ... i see concreeeete .... Muhawawawaw
111074527eb9578326.gif
111074527eb7755fd3.gif
111074527eb7757f0b.gif
111074527eb7759e48.gif

:mad:
 

Attachments

  • woman_wtc.jpg
    woman_wtc.jpg
    35 KB · Views: 7
It does when the walls are being pulled inward:
[qimg]http://uploads.abovetopsecret.com/ats25069_bowing1.JPG[/qimg]

That is simply the fastners on the aluminum facade panels letting go. They were seriously giving up from bimetal corrosion.

Read Tom Scott Gordon.
 
So tell me - what on god greens earth is your evidence beside that cool picture?
 
That's right, Steel is indestructable. Nothing on earth can bend or break steel. This is coming from a contractor that thinks that elevator rails are made from 32 inch steel columns.

Apparently small words like "or" escape you. Maybe it is their meaning rather than just having 2 letters. Here, let me help with that.

Guide rails "Or" their support structures, "or" freight elevator landing support structures.
 
Clearly, what ever the minimal fire might have done, it bears no comparison to this damage. She's alive on the 94th floor. is that where your fire was?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3406&stc=1&d=1160267765

Minimal fire? Are you blind? Or stupid?

Edna Cintron was maybe at that time at the safest position she could be. The initial fires had gone out, and the wind was blowing in her direction, allowing her to stay clear of the smoke and subsequential fires.

Don't ever bring her into the discussion about the magnitude or the heat of the fires again, you are being disrespectful to this victim!
 
Give it a try. Send me your hard evidence and i sue them in germany.

I would suggest developing a respect for how the pupeteers work first. There is no real connection to gwb and the WTC.

I will say that the Germans have a healthy respect for reasoning so it is fully possible that the first meaningful court actons related to 9-11 could happen there.
 
Clearly, what ever the minimal fire might have done, it bears no comparison to this damage. She's alive on the 94th floor. is that where your fire was?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3406&stc=1&d=1160267765

There was never any fire in that impact hole where she is standing. All of the combustible material in that area would have been bulldozed further into the building by the plane strike.

There were however serious fires all around the impact gash, and on every other face of the tower.
 
I would suggest developing a respect for how the pupeteers work first. There is no real connection to gwb and the WTC.

I will say that the Germans have a healthy respect for reasoning so it is fully possible that the first meaningful court actons related to 9-11 could happen there.

They have no international rights to sue another gov but the press here would drive crazy with such a story. :D

Okay - how do the puppeteers work? Tell me.
 
Minimal fire? Are you blind? Or stupid?

Edna Cintron was maybe at that time at the safest position she could be. The initial fires had gone out, and the wind was blowing in her direction, allowing her to stay clear of the smoke and subsequential fires.

Don't ever bring her into the discussion about the magnitude or the heat of the fires again, you are being disrespectful to this victim!

What is being disrespectful about stating she was alive?

I recognize what you are saying about the conditions. However, bright red-ornage flames do not generate the kind of heat required to cause structural failures in tempered steel, .......... ever with the configuration of those panels.

Check the critical thinking meter.
 
They have no international rights to sue another gov but the press here would drive crazy with such a story. :D

Okay - how do the puppeteers work? Tell me.

INFERENCE ONE

Relating potentials for hypnotic performance to results of research, practice and experiments of hypnosis. Christopher A. Brown 8/17/01

BASIS 1 of INFERENCE

The first sentance of page 175 of EMOTIONS and MEMORY, 1964, by David Rappaport,

"The general tendency" of the subject to forget the events of the trance after emerging from it."

BASIS 2 of INFERENCE

(1) of the same paragraph states that, "The hypnotist can successfully suggest that no posthypnotic amnesia develop".

Basis 2 Restated; Suggestion conducive to remembering is successful or generally, suggestion effecting memory has effect against a general tendancy.

CONDITIONS OF BASIS

The first note page 175, EMOTIONS and MEMORY, Note #8 states (first note below main text) that the results of memory described "in general are valid only with subjects who are able to reach the somanmbulistic stages ofhypnosis."

INFERENCE ONE

Logical inference of BASIS 1 with BASIS 2, is that; suggestion to forget will have a greater effect on memory because of the general "tendency to forget". Research confirms with observations of behavior consistent with general hyperamnesia at the top of page 176, the end of a footnote that begins on page 175 stating;

"we find hypnotized people indignantly denying they have been hypnotized."

INFERENCE ONE

If the tendancy is to forget following hypnosis that induces a trance to the level of somanmbulism and suggection effecting memory is successful then suggestion to forget will be more effective than suggestion to remember.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3407&stc=1&d=1160268810
 

Attachments

  • emomem175.jpeg
    emomem175.jpeg
    76.6 KB · Views: 6
INFERENCE ONE

Relating potentials for hypnotic performance to results of research, practice and experiments of hypnosis. Christopher A. Brown 8/17/01

BASIS 1 of INFERENCE

The first sentance of page 175 of EMOTIONS and MEMORY, 1964, by David Rappaport,

"The general tendency" of the subject to forget the events of the trance after emerging from it."

BASIS 2 of INFERENCE

(1) of the same paragraph states that, "The hypnotist can successfully suggest that no posthypnotic amnesia develop".

Basis 2 Restated; Suggestion conducive to remembering is successful or generally, suggestion effecting memory has effect against a general tendancy.

CONDITIONS OF BASIS

The first note page 175, EMOTIONS and MEMORY, Note #8 states (first note below main text) that the results of memory described "in general are valid only with subjects who are able to reach the somanmbulistic stages ofhypnosis."

INFERENCE ONE

Logical inference of BASIS 1 with BASIS 2, is that; suggestion to forget will have a greater effect on memory because of the general "tendency to forget". Research confirms with observations of behavior consistent with general hyperamnesia at the top of page 176, the end of a footnote that begins on page 175 stating;

"we find hypnotized people indignantly denying they have been hypnotized."

INFERENCE ONE

If the tendancy is to forget following hypnosis that induces a trance to the level of somanmbulism and suggection effecting memory is successful then suggestion to forget will be more effective than suggestion to remember.

Huh? Hypnosis? These are your hard facts? :boggled:
So what or who is the NWO?
 
Oliver, it was the Hypnotoad! Get your facts straight!
 

Attachments

  • Hypnotoad_animated.gif
    Hypnotoad_animated.gif
    15.4 KB · Views: 96
Oliver, it was the Hypnotoad! Get your facts straight!

The hypnotoad is just a patsy in the whoooooole NWO-plot. :D

BTW: What definitions do we have for the term "Troll" concerning christopheras crap?
 
There was never any fire in that impact hole where she is standing. All of the combustible material in that area would have been bulldozed further into the building by the plane strike.

There were however serious fires all around the impact gash, and on every other face of the tower.

This I agree with. Meaning that the combustibles were pushed up against the core and the interio box columns burning there and weakening them, causing the tower top to fall to the north.

Oops, it fell to the south. Uhhh, .... critical thinking leads me to think that plane impacts had nothing to do with the towers coming down. Ohhhh and the towers went to the ground at near free fall rates.

Perhaps critical thinkers should start thinking about high explosives optimally placed and distributed considering the uniformity of the explosion seen here,

Uhhh, they would have to sincerely love the United States Of America, its Constitution, the rights and freedoms guaranteed by it (empowering their motives for critical thinking) before trying to think at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom