• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Here is what ULTIMA1 will see...
pomeroo said:
"Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn't want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn't even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn't know how stable any of this area was. We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o'clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then. At that point in time, it seemed like a somewhat smaller event, but under any normal circumstances, that's a major event, a 47-story building collapsing."
Click to expand...
 
GodisEnergy said:
Barry jennings RIP said he hearde explosionss before the towers collapsed
Case Closed = inside job
Click to expand...

There's already a thread for that- don't derail this one.

Unless you're saying the death of Barry Jennings is your best evidence...
 
youve got threads for everything
If just ONE of these threads is wrong and which alot of them are based on speculation then do you realise what your protecting
Do you?
 
GodisEnergy said:
youve got threads for everything
If just ONE of these threads is wrong and which alot of them are based on speculation then do you realise what your protecting
Do you?
Click to expand...

I think a far more important question would be what if a truther got just ONE thing right. Then I might have reason to be concerned.
 
GodisEnergy said:
youve got threads for everything
If just ONE of these threads is wrong and which alot of them are based on speculation then do you realise what your protecting
Do you?
Click to expand...

That doesn't even make any sense- and it has nothing to do with the OP.
 
Molten iron coming out of south tower not aluminium, aluminium would appear silver ,it would have melted at red hot temperatures flowed away from heat source and turned silver far before falling out the tower.
Iron spheres and vapourised lead show temperatures higher than normal office fires thus requiring extra energy source aka thermte.
Sulfidization of steel also requires higher temp than office fires.
Squibs 40 stories below the pulverisation zone,where did the debris /material come from 40 stories below the zone of pulverisation zone come from.
Military wargames on 911 ..involving injection of phantoms onto faa radar screens.
i could go on all day
 
GodisEnergy said:
youve got threads for everything
If just ONE of these threads is wrong and which alot of them are based on speculation then do you realise what your protecting
Do you?
Click to expand...

If any of your accusations prove to be true and have solid, tangible evidence that contradicts the already available researched evidence, then i would admit to being wrong.
On the other hand, your evidence does not overshadow the evidence currently available now. This implies your argument has no merit and you are the one speculating. This means you're the one who is wrong.
 
Last edited:
GodisEnergy said:
Molten iron coming out of south tower not aluminium, aluminium would appear silver ,it would have melted at red hot temperatures flowed away from heat source and turned silver far before falling out the tower.
Iron spheres and vapourised lead show temperatures higher than normal office fires thus requiring extra energy source aka thermte.
Sulfidization of steel also requires higher temp than office fires.
Squibs 40 stories below the pulverisation zone,where did the debris /material come from 40 stories below the zone of pulverisation zone come from.
Military wargames on 911 ..involving injection of phantoms onto faa radar screens.
i could go on all day
Click to expand...

You could, but let Me give you a heads up on that. All the arguments you bring up have been brought up many times and years before you even started reading them.
Read post #668.
 
Last edited:
The Salomon building or building No 7 was brought down by explosive charges. There was a show on the History Channel about 911 and it showed a film crew entering the building and there was no fire on the lower floors. Which debunks the theory that the building was brought down by fire. THe Saloman brothers made millions by cashing in on insurance policies from the demolished buildings.
 
Mark Carter said:
The Salomon building or building No 7 was brought down by explosive charges. There was a show on the History Channel about 911 and it showed a film crew entering the building and there was no fire on the lower floors. Which debunks the theory that the building was brought down by fire. THe Saloman brothers made millions by cashing in on insurance policies from the demolished buildings.
Click to expand...

Pssst... look UP.
 
RedIbis said:
So you're saying that for a theory to be true, it must have evidence behind it. Do you think it's necessary for there to be physical evidence? In other words, if my theory is premised on Column 79, do you think this column should exist, be available for examination, and any theory premised on this column without producing it is invalid?
Click to expand...

It depends on what your theory is. If you claim that column had thermite on it, then yes, you would need the column to prove it.

What is your theory?
 
GodisEnergy said:
Molten iron coming out of south tower not aluminium, aluminium would appear silver ,it would have melted at red hot temperatures flowed away from heat source and turned silver far before falling out the tower.
Iron spheres and vapourised lead show temperatures higher than normal office fires thus requiring extra energy source aka thermte.
Sulfidization of steel also requires higher temp than office fires.
Squibs 40 stories below the pulverisation zone,where did the debris /material come from 40 stories below the zone of pulverisation zone come from.
Military wargames on 911 ..involving injection of phantoms onto faa radar screens.
i could go on all day
Click to expand...

Not only are some of these not true, speculation or uneducated guesses but NONE of them are evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. Thanks for playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom