Truthers...what is your best piece of evidence ?

checkitb4uwreckit said:
governments dont investigate themselves and to think that the zelikow led 911 commission would produce anything that might point the finger at the bush admin or any govt agency is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Ah, so then the Senate Select Committee to Investigate Campaign Practices just twiddled its thumbs instead of gathering evidence and Richard Nixon served out an uneventful second term, leaving office on January 20, 1976.

And we put all that effort into trying to decipher Sam Ervin's accent. Thanks for clearing that up.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Thats funny because i have been posting lots of evidence and have a lot more to post.
Click to expand...

Well, I suppose the first order in any debate is to come to a consensus on the exact definition of 'real evidence' then.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Thats funny because i have been posting lots pf evidence and have a lot more to post.
Click to expand...
Please make a list.
I found your posts have zero evidence to support your ideas on 9/11.
A list would help everyone see your massive effort is based on evidence.
 
beachnut said:
Please make a list.
I found your posts have zero evidence to support your ideas on 9/11.
A list would help everyone see your massive effort is based on evidence.
Click to expand...

Just becasue you refuse to accept the evidence does not mean it is not evidnece. just a couple to start, more later.

Let me repeat for the closed minded and evidence impaired.

1. Even more evidence the firemen were pulled out BEFORE the phone call.

http://911guide.googlepages.com/danielnigro
For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.

2. Engineering article about steel being heated.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...agar-0112.html
It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. It was noted above that the wind load controlled the design allowables. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.
 
Last edited:
You know what would be good evidence, ULTIMA1?

Post an example of any burining 20+ story building being "pulled" before or after 9/11.

Otherwise, the whole "pull" theory is blown out of the water.

If you can cite no examples of it ever being down before or since....its pretty much a silly theory.
 
Gavron said:
You know what would be good evidence, ULTIMA1?
Click to expand...


You know would be even better evidence for your side if you could show a steel building that has collapsed from fire in the US before or after the WTC buildings.

Oh thats right it has never happened excpept on 9/11.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
You know would be even better evidence for your side if you could show a steel building that has collapsed from fire in the US before or after the WTC buildings.

Oh thats right it has never happened excpept on 9/11.
Click to expand...

Why do you omit the fact that it was impact and fires that brought down the towers, an extraordinary event? For someone who claims not be a truther, you sure sound like one.
 
I'm not the one making the ridiculous claim that the fire dept "pulled" WTC7....something that has never been done ever.

Might as well say lazers from that 2000 mile long UFO thats coming back here Oct 14th did it. Not like you need evidence to support your conspiracy theories anyway...
 
TexasJack said:
Why do you omit the fact that it was impact and fires that brought down the towers, an extraordinary event? For someone who claims not be a truther, you sure sound like one.
Click to expand...

Why do you omit the fact that no plane hit building 7.

You also omit the facts that several reports show the planes impacts caused very little damage.

For someone who claims to know something you do not sound like one.
 
Be warned - the discussion is not what Ultima1 is "in it" for. He's not after truth, or even 'his' version of the "truth". He's in it to be as disruptive, combative and hostile as possible. In short, he enjoys the attention and will say just about anything to keep the argument going.

People, we are talking about a guy who has amassed (as of now) 418 420 posts in a matter of single digit days.

Don’t take my word for it; Google his screen name.
 
Last edited:
Gavron said:
I'm not the one making the ridiculous claim that the fire dept "pulled" WTC7....something that has never been done ever.
Click to expand...

But you are the one making the ridiculous claim that the bulding collapsed from fire. Something that has never happened before or since in the US.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Why do you omit the fact that no plane hit building 7.

You also omit the facts that several reports show the planes impacts caused very little damage.

For someone who claims to know something you do not sound like one.
Click to expand...

OK, WTC 7 was hit by debris from WTC 1 as well, another unique event. Happy? Now, answer my question, why did you omit the impact of the planes?
 
Gavron said:
Might as well say lazers from that 2000 mile long UFO thats coming back here Oct 14th did it. Not like you need evidence to support your conspiracy theories anyway...
Click to expand...
i dont know about 2000 miles long or oct 14th, but lasers and UFOs have already come up
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Why do you omit the fact that no plane hit building 7.

You also omit the facts that several reports show the planes impacts caused very little damage.

For someone who claims to know something you do not sound like one.
Click to expand...

Also, can you link those reports that the impacts caused "very little damage."
 
ULTIMA1 said:
But you are the one making the ridiculous claim that the bulding collapsed from fire. Something that has never happened before or since in the US.
Click to expand...

How often do 47 story buildings catch fire on multiple floors at once with no water available to fight the fires inside them?

Was the Tacoma Narrows Suspension Bridge destroyed by wind? That had never happened before it did and hasn't happened since. By your logic that makes it impossible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom