Official story: why believe it?

[lisabob2]

so you dont believe the official story because its consistent with the laws of physics?

because it is NOT. as many qualified scientist have pointed out

 

[beachnut]

I am not making anything up.
You are mistaken. I just believe Steven Jones, Gordon Ross, & David Griscom are right. Are you saying they are making this all up?
It is really not much use just to dismiss a point by saying "you are lying" why not get specific?

I showed you Jones making up a lie, you covered it up and said he was not. I showed you his failed ideas on 9/11, you covered it up and failed to realize he made up thermite after 4 years. He just got up one day and made it up cause he was upset with the war in Iraq. He will not even tell you why he is making up lies. He does not even make a valid conclusion now.

You can not even tell me what he says about 9/11.

I have shown he columns he tried to imply were cut by thermite. He shows more than one. He is making it up. He has no valid ideas on 9/11, you have failed to provide what he said, or what it means.

You said broke the laws of physics! What broke them?

You said Skilling was the chief, I told you Robertson was. I told you Robertson, the chief structural engineer, supports IMPACT and FIRE, as the cause of the WTC failure. That makes Jones ideas false, since Jones has never built a 110 story building. The expert agrees with THOUSANDS of experts! You have a few people with nut case ideas on 9/11 and you do not even know it!

 

[OneShotKi11]

Ok i want to enter this conversation and would like to start by asking miss Lisa what it is she is confused about right now?

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Google John Skilling engineer of the twin towers. Look at engineering firm
Worthington, Skilling, Helle and Jackson. What no Robertson? maybe robertson was under Skilling as any article during construction clearly shows.

In City in the Sky, Robertson is called the “rising young engineer with Skilling's firm” (p. 159). In Men of Steel, Robertson is referred to during the design phase as “one of the up-and-coming engineers on [Skilling’s] staff,” Skilling’s “young associate,” whom Skilling “assigned… to help him prepare a proposal” to the Port Authority’s board. Skilling’s firm was named Worthington, Skilling, Helle, and Jackson. Clearly, Skilling was a senior partner at the firm and Robertson was his subordinate."

need any more facts?

just because skilling is robertsons boss doesnt mean skilling was cheif engineer for the project, if it was robertsons project it was robertsons project

 

[defaultdotxbe]

because it is NOT. as many qualified scientist have pointed out

so now we are back to johnnyclueless's question

what laws of physics are violated according to the official story?

 

[beachnut]

still WRONG

Google John Skilling engineer of the twin towers. Look at engineering firm
Worthington, Skilling, Helle and Jackson. What no Robertson? maybe robertson was under Skilling as any article during construction clearly shows.

In City in the Sky, Robertson is called the “rising young engineer with Skilling's firm” (p. 159). In Men of Steel, Robertson is referred to during the design phase as “one of the up-and-coming engineers on [Skilling’s] staff,” Skilling’s “young associate,” whom Skilling “assigned… to help him prepare a proposal” to the Port Authority’s board. Skilling’s firm was named Worthington, Skilling, Helle, and Jackson. Clearly, Skilling was a senior partner at the firm and Robertson was his subordinate."

need any more facts?

OH, GOOGLE!? Wow, google it. No wonder I have just facts, you googled it!

Darn, why did I not google it and find the liars of 9/11 truth junk? Wowzer! (you have to use judgment then you google; you seem to be lacking the knowledge needed to use judgment to find facts)

FACT - Robertson was the Chief Structural Engineer on the WTC - if you google hard enough and sort out the BS you can find this.

Robertson was the man - here is a quote from him

"My responsibility was to conceive and direct the various research activities. The robustness and stamina of the buildings is my responsibility. All the drawings have my name on them."

And I broke the laws of research and used google to find this! -

Leslie E. Robertson (born 1928) was the chief engineer in charge of design of the World Trade Center in New York, which was destroyed in the September 11, 2001 attacks. He has been structural engineer on numerous other projects, including the Shanghai World Financial Center and the Bank of China Tower in Hong Kong.

Even the BBC (Lennon mentions them) says

The chief structural engineer on the project was Leslie Robertson, ... (the project in question? WTC towers)

I am not saying Skilling does not know anything, but the things you said about Skilling were CHERRY PICKED and presented to you by 9/11 truth idiots.

Fact the design impact for the WTC 707 impact would be a 187 pounds of TNT event. On 9/11 we have 11 as a 1300 pounds of TNT event, and 175 as a 2200 pounds of TNT event. This is why the impacts on 9/11 lead to severe structural damage and the large amount of fuel started large fires.

You have fallen for the misinformation of 9/11 truth.

 

[OneShotKi11]

Where did you show Jones making up lies i would like to read it???

Also Lisa please answer what laws of physics you believe were broken that day i might be of some help since i read alot about this topic and still remain slightly neutral.

 

[HereticHulk]

Still no facts. Darn, have you wasted 6 years and not even tried to research this. You just post statements not based on facts or logic. Start a thread with HH top facts why 9/11 is whatever!

Are you saying the destroyed CIA tapes and subsequent cover-up and how they were important to the 9/11 investigation is hearsay!?

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/911_commissioner_No_doubt_we_asked_1224.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/22/AR2007122201622.html

the commission did not specifically ask for videotapes, in part because investigators had only "a vague understanding of what to seek" and ran into frequent roadblocks with the agency. CIA officials have said that the tapes were not provided because the commission did not specifically ask for them.

This is the essence of my argument. How is any type of truth realated to the facts possible when evidence is destroyed and/or covered up? We could talk about the tensile strength of construction grade steal until the cows come home....fact is is that a cover-up has been employed and therefore a conspiracy is afoot and further investigation is needed.

 

[OneShotKi11]

From my quick read on the internet i am finding that Robertson and his then-business partner John Skilling were the original structural engineers for the Twin Towers.

 

[Burrell]

need any more facts?

Yes. Sorry to mention this again but how about quoting some Human Resource (HR) theorists? I am serious. We have enough threads on the buildings, Jones, LC and 911 Truth sites to fill at least three textbooks. It might well be worth trying a 'new' angle.

Also whilst we are talking about HR how about finding out how someone was motivated to conduct what has suggested by those that do not agree with “The Official Version”?

So far on this very forum we have "No Plane", "No Sound" and "Explosives" threads yet not one person has been able, after all this time, to explain the things that, I feel, are probably more important.

Who did it? By that I mean what is the name the agent that was involved in planting said explosives? Or flew the drone? Or took the passengers off the flight?

Why did he/she/they do it? By that I mean what was their motivation?

What actually did they do? By that I mean what form of skills that person bring to the conspiracy and what skills did they acquire in order to carry it out?

When did they actually do what they are accused of?

Where were they when the towers fell?

How do you come to the conclusions stated for the above Who, Why, What, When, and where questions?

Setting that aside, I wish all the users on the sub forum, regardless of their point of view, a Happy New Year. Maybe we can come to an agreement on some points in 2008?

 

[beachnut]

with respect to 9/11 Jones is wrong

Where did you show Jones making up lies i would like to read it???

Also Lisa please answer what laws of physics you believe were broken that day i might be of some help since i read alot about this topic and still remain slightly neutral.

All his ideas are false. Please take any of them and defend them with facts and evidence to support any of his non conclusions. Go ahead have fun presenting nothing.

 

[OneShotKi11]

Are you saying the destroyed CIA tapes and subsequent cover-up and how they were important to the 9/11 investigation is hearsay!?

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/911_commissioner_No_doubt_we_asked_1224.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/22/AR2007122201622.html

What do destroyed interrogation tapes have to do with the argument?

I could understand if it was destroyed tapes of the pentagon crash but not of the inhuman interrogation tapes. What is the point of posting this?

 

[defaultdotxbe]

What do destroyed interrogation tapes have to do with the argument?

I could understand if it was destroyed tapes of the pentagon crash but not of the inhuman interrogation tapes. What is the point of posting this?

because he doesnt have any real evidence to post

 

[OneShotKi11]

All his ideas are false. Please take any of them and defend them with facts and evidence to support any of his non conclusions. Go ahead have fun presenting nothing.

I didnbt say i believe his wingnut ideas you clown ****. I am just clearly point out your poor debating skills!

You made a claim early and then i pointed out how you miss phrased it and how your use was wrong.
You then yell at this poor confused lady saying i already pointed out where he (Jones) was lying. Yet when i ask you to point to me exactly where you pointed this out you have nothing but your own conclusions backed by more of your own conclusions.

I know the evidence is out there that will prove Jones wrong but you surely arent presenting any of it, and expect this 9/11 truther to believe you based on your conclusions and poorly argued word. Good job *******!

Please keep in mind that your membership agreement requires you to be civil and polite - attack the argument, and not the person making the argument.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jmercer

 

[beachnut]

I didnbt say i believe his wingnut ideas you clown dick. I am just clearly point out your poor debating skills!

You made a claim early and then i pointed out how you miss phrased it and how your use was wrong.
You then yell at this poor confused lady saying i already pointed out where he (Jones) was lying. Yet when i ask you to point to me exactly where you pointed this out you have nothing but your own conclusions backed by more of your own conclusions.

I know the evidence is out there that will prove Jones wrong but you surely arent presenting any of it, and expect this 9/11 truther to believe you based on your conclusions and poorly argued word. Good job *******!

Same to you. Thank you.

I already showed the research challenged lady/person some simple lies Jones has made.

I do not care if my debating skills are bad or poor. It is self critiquing if the liars win the debate and the terminally stupid follow them. They deserve it. What do you think?

Breaking the "laws of physics" is a red flag of those who make up lies about 9/11. It is a simple guide, if a someone says "broke the laws of physics" you have found a person ignorant on 9/11 who believes, without facts, the lies of 9/11 truth. Try it out, it works.

You should present the Jones lies in a sweet method for them. I find it odd debunking lies that anyone can figure out. I think they need to present the facts to support Jones. Not take my time and look up all this crap for them. They have the wild claims, they should support them. To not even know Jones made up his ideas and his Journal. His Journal was made up because his papers are not factually based. Explain this to the truthers. Please show me how to present information to expose Jones' lies. Show me how to debate it and not be an ******* like me. Thank you.

You are not understanding what I mean --- Breaking the "laws of physics" is a red flag of those who make up lies about 9/11. It is a simple guide, if a someone says "broke the laws of physics" you have found a person ignorant on 9/11 who believes, without facts, the lies of 9/11 truth. Try it out, it works. --- it works well! (breaking the laws of physics is stupid statement and only truthers use it)

 

[OneShotKi11]

Now back to what im trying to get at....
Lisa please state and individual case of the laws of physics being broken on 9/11. It it hard for me to debate you on this if i dont have a specific instance you believe it was done at.

You might even point something out to me i never noticed before and i just want to know what you know!

 

[OneShotKi11]

Are you not understanding their use of the term ''BROKE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS"???

They are saying that people like you and what you believe is what is breaking the laws of physics not them! What more do i have to say to get this through to you!!!!!

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

because it is NOT. as many qualified scientist have pointed out

You listed David Ray Griffin as a "qualified scientist" who disputes the generally accepted account of 9/11. Can you tell me what his credentials are? Can you then tell me how they are relevant to 9/11?

 

[HereticHulk]

What do destroyed interrogation tapes have to do with the argument?

I could understand if it was destroyed tapes of the pentagon crash but not of the inhuman interrogation tapes. What is the point of posting this?

Thats million dollar question!

We'll never know what 'facts' were brought up by the 'purported' master minds of the 9/11 because the evidence was destroyed. So we do not know what the tapes have to do with the argument? The only thing this proves is that there is a conspiracy involving the CIA w/ regards to the 9/11 investigation.

Look, with these types of blantant cover-ups abound the 9/11 truth movement will never die!

There are obviously some honest people left in the CIA or we would've ever heard about these tapes. Lets reopen the investigation (maybe spend more $$ then the Clinton BJ investigation this time around) and see what happens!?

What are you scared of?

Perhaps the JREF 9/11 debunkers will have to go back to debunking Sylvia Brown once the true 9/11 perps are sitting in prison?

 

[OneShotKi11]

I dont believe in the stupid CT theories that most truthers believe about control Demo and whatnot, but there has been some rather interesting research involving money trails The stock market and what not. I do feel there was some foul play involving the events of September 11 and feel that further research might reveal a little more.

At this moment i cant exactly remember where i seen these studies and articles i have read but i will try and find them as soon as possible and post them up. It is an interesting read if you have the time.