Adventures with AE911truth

[PhantomWolf]

Oh I always love the Truthers going with Nukes. It's the perfect time to bring up a guy named Jay Jonas.....

 

[PhantomWolf]

I can well believe it. Shame a ct will think of it as disinfo.

yeah it's not like Aluminium can really be melted by a simple fire.....

 

[peteweaver]

Amusingly even Judy Wood, points out that Aluminium can glow when hot.

http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/glowing.html

If only she had the sense to realise that the fires in the buildings were hot enough to do that to aluminium, and that the mini nuke / space beams theory is cow dung.

 

[AZCat]

I just noticed Christopher Brown (a.k.a. Christophera) has joined AE9/11Truth.



They have no idea what they're in for.

 

[Kent1]

I just noticed Christopher Brown (a.k.a. Christophera) has joined AE9/11Truth.



They have no idea what they're in for.

AE has a new video I guess that is supposed to be refuting the top down collapse.

http://www.ae911truth.org/flashmov2.htm
Turther post here.
http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=12383&st=4425

Note the collapse. Note the fragmentation of the upper block breaking into two pieces.

Aside from the other problems with this, note the full story and preperation

http://www.phillyblast.com/benthere.htm
http://www.phillyblast.com/prepare.htm
http://www.phillyblast.com/testshot.htm

To work around the problem, only the top half of the building will be demolished in the blast. A vertical cut in the building will separate the top into 2 smaller halves, with one falling to one side, one to the other side. The bottom half will remain standing, and will be wrecking balled, or imploded at a later date.

This shot of the north side of the building (the side visible from I-95), gives a good indication of how the top half of the building will fall apart. Look at the middle column on the open wall. Just above and to the right of this column is a vertical cut made all the way to the top of the building. There may not be enough clarity in the scanned photo to show it, but this cut runs all the way to the top of the building, getting narrower towards the top. This is the line which will divide the top half of the structure into 2 smaller halves. One will fall to one side, one to the other side. The south side of the building has a similar cut.

On the left side of this photo is the row of columns that will be shot during the implosion. 3 holes will be drilled into each column and loaded with explosives. The set of columns on the right side with not be shot, allowing it to act as a hinge wall. This will allow the blaster to control the direction of the fall of the floors above.

 

[beachnut]

I just noticed Christopher Brown (a.k.a. Christophera) has joined AE9/11Truth.



They have no idea what they're in for.

Paul Doherty *
Manchester, Lancashire – England

More experts. This is the level of expert they have. Standard issue truthers.

Christopher A. Brown, Engineering staff, Survey Party Chief *
Santa Barbara, california

Did Chris hold the stick? I built horse jumps one summer, what fancy name would that have?

 

[scissorhands]

Massimo Dell'Affidabilità, Ing., Engineer, Structural Specialist *
Milano, Lombardia – Italy

Do they think thats a real name?
It translates as "maximum reliability".
Anyone with knowledge of Italian can correct me if Im wrong.

 

[Horatius]

Did Chris hold the stick? I built horse jumps one summer, what fancy name would that have?

Equine Elevation Challenge Engineer (uncertified).


You're welcome.

 

[Doug Plumb]

Lets be clear about why I will not debate any of you debunkers:

You lie. You misrepresent your qualifications. You support the officials lies and ignore obvious fact, but most of all YOU LIE all the time. Peter Weaver you lied and said you were a degreed engineer. You lose right there.

I have spent many hours argueing 9/11 on sites like this. The science that gets introduced is always incorrect, sometimes laughable.

But you don't need to be an architect or structural engineer to know that 9/11 was an inside job. All you have to do is READ THE FEMA REPORT !!!

Its right there in black and white:

(1) Sulfidization of steel that could not be explained

(2) The supports that would have to fail could not have

(3) They admit that their theories had only a very "low probability of occurance"

Also, its been shown that wtc'97 was an inside job with leaked tapes. Its a matter of congressional testimony that the bombs described in the official version of the OKC bombing could not have done the damage. Mainstream reported bombs inside the building after the blasts. Lee Harvey Oswald did not shoot JFK.

I have no interest in anything but honest debate and its impossible to debate 9/11 theories with dupporters of the official version. Even PM, Nova, BBC & NIST misrepresented the construction of the buildings wrt strength & size of central core.

As far as the architect that said he would debate anyone, anytime on 9/11 conspiracy theories, I don't believe him. I've debated too many structural engineers and watched my fellow truthers with no scientific background make mincemeat out of their arguements using facts from the incident.

Go head...debunk away.

 

[Doug Plumb]

No one stays on the AE911truth as an eng or architect unless we see their diploma so if you see an "IP Nightly" listed its only temporary.

You guys can stop using fake names because they don't get up there.

BTW There can be a $10,000.00 fine for representing yourself as an engineer.

 

[Doug Plumb]

Just the title of your thread "Debunking Conspiracy Theories" shows your level of mental capability - it implies that there are no such thing as conspiracies. Of course conspiracies exist - even evil conspiracies.

 

[kookbreaker]

No one stays on the AE911truth as an eng or architect unless we see their diploma so if you see an "IP Nightly" listed its only temporary.

Any website or other org. that posts the names of anyone who just types stuff in without even the most basic of background checks is being dishonest and trying to swell their ranks.

You guys can stop using fake names because they don't get up there.

But they do. That's what makes your whole group such a bad joke. Sure, you get to removing them eventually, but you look damn silly and dishonest in the meantime.

BTW There can be a $10,000.00 fine for representing yourself as an engineer.

Not to a group such as yours. Not a chance in hell.

 

[uk_dave]

Got bored over at A&E? No one to talk to?

 

[kookbreaker]

Just the title of your thread "Debunking Conspiracy Theories" shows your level of mental capability - it implies that there are no such thing as conspiracies. Of course conspiracies exist - even evil conspiracies.

Its always funny how people's own pedantry can set them off on a tirade of insults.

Conspiracies exist, certainly. What we debunk are conspiracy theories, which is the nonsense that is to conspiracies what pseudo-science is to science.

 

[kookbreaker]

:

(1) Sulfidization of steel that could not be explained

Its been explained, many times already. Wasn't that muh to get excited about to begin with.

(2) The supports that would have to fail could not have

According to....? Not FEMA.

(3) They admit that their theories had only a very "low probability of occurance"

They admit that about one theory, and 'low probability' is infinitely higher than the nonsense ideas y'all come up with.

 

[~enigma~]

Lets be clear about why I will not debate any of you debunkers:

You lie....Also, its been shown that wtc'97 was an inside job with leaked tapes.

Says the guy who claims whatever happened at the wtc in 97 was an inside job and there is proof on tape....

 

[Gravy]

Actually, Doug, you won't debate us because you're an intellectual coward and an incompetent who has no idea what he's talking about.

Yeah, you.

And while you're admonishing us to read the FEMA report, you really should read the NIST report, which is the official version of the tower collapses. You'll find it here.

 

[Totovader]

No one stays on the AE911truth as an eng or architect unless we see their diploma so if you see an "IP Nightly" listed its only temporary.

You guys can stop using fake names because they don't get up there.

BTW There can be a $10,000.00 fine for representing yourself as an engineer.

Nonsense.

Thankfully- for your lot- the fine doesn't apply to people pretending to be experts. The fine would apply to people who fake credentials to obtain a job.

There is no crime for saying you're an engineer, architect, or anything else (besides police officer). So don't try and hide behind some silly misinterpretation of the law and think it indemnifies you. Failing to check the credentials of people who want to "join your cause" is far more despicable than people pointing out a significant flaw in the requirements for the group.

 

[Totovader]

Just the title of your thread "Debunking Conspiracy Theories" shows your level of mental capability - it implies that there are no such thing as conspiracies. Of course conspiracies exist - even evil conspiracies.

Like many conspiracists, you fail to understand the difference between "conspiracy theory" and "conspiracy".

A dictionary should clear that up for you.

 

[Gravy]

Says the guy who claims whatever happened at the wtc in 97 was an inside job and there is proof on tape....

With typical twoofer accuracy he's referring to the 1993 bombing, not 1997, and no, there is no proof of anything but an attack by Islamic radicals.