Former Rooski Nucular Intelligence Officer To Blow the Reveal Entire 911 Plot

911thology said:
Dear listeners. I would like to close this discussion with the following 'optimistic' note:
1) I noticed that not even one of you was genuinely interested in the topic.
2) None of you bothered to watch my movie before asking anything.
3) All of you are preconceived with an embedded idea that I am a liar.
4) All of you have truly strange belief that I allegedly owe you something.
If you re-view my very first (big) post on this thread where I set my conditions you will notice that this discussion has gone not the way I wished it to go and none of the conditions of mine was honored. Therefore I would like to wish you all the best and quit this discussion. If anyone appears here later with genuine interest he is always welcome to find my e-mail on the Internet and send his personalized questions to me. Otherwise I could be contacted via YouTube ‘911thology’ channel. Best wishes. Dimitri.
Click to expand...

So, you com here with a bunch of completely absurd claims that are clearly a bad joke or the result of delusional thinking, demonstrate complete ignorance of basic physics, refuse to provide anything remotely resembling supporting evidence, and expect to be taken seriously?
 
tj15 said:
From what I watched (most of the videos through part 18), he believes the most insane theories of 9/11. He believs in the no-plane theory. He believes a missile hit the Pentagon. And he believes nukes brought down the buildings in the WTC.

Things he MUST believe for those theories to be correct:

1. ALL of the eyewitnesses at the Pentagon are either liars, government paid agents/people, completely wrong in what they saw, ect.

2. The outer walls of the towers managed to survive the nuclear blasts and not get damaged while stuff on the inside turned to dust.

3. The seismic data is fake. He claims the nukes would register 5.7 (I think that's what he said) on the richter scale; 2.1 and 2.3 is what was really registered on the richter scale (correct me if I'm wrong) during the collapses of the towers.

4. ALL of the videos of the planes hitting the towers were faked. This would have to include not only the videos from the news stations, but also people on the streets and in nearby buildings on their personal video cameras.

These are just a few things he must believe...
Click to expand...

Lemme guess: He doesn't provide any actual evidence for any of those claims, right? He just states them outright as if they were self evident, right? No "I know this Pentagon witness is lying because (explanation)", no "Here's photographic proof", no "Here's a real seismometer readout", and no "Here's proof of them faking the planes impact: (Presentation of proof)". Have I guessed right?
 
Does anyone else ever feel sorta gypped by the truthers when they refuse to provide evidence of their assertions?
 
Sabrina said:
Does anyone else ever feel sorta gypped by the truthers when they refuse to provide evidence of their assertions?
Click to expand...

Well, it's a Catch-22, because I also feel gypped when they do present it. Usually because it ends up being the same old :talk034: regurgitated under a different forum name. There's no winning; we get ripped off either way. :cool:
 
I'm becoming more and more aware over time that this particular conspiracy theory breeds some of the most bizarre mindsets I've ever come across.
 
Gorgonian said:
I'm becoming more and more aware over time that this particular conspiracy theory breeds some of the most bizarre mindsets I've ever come across.
Click to expand...
.
Yes, these guys give cognitive dissonance a bad reputation!
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Lemme guess: He doesn't provide any actual evidence for any of those claims, right? He just states them outright as if they were self evident, right? No "I know this Pentagon witness is lying because (explanation)", no "Here's photographic proof", no "Here's a real seismometer readout", and no "Here's proof of them faking the planes impact: (Presentation of proof)". Have I guessed right?
Click to expand...

I'd have to watch it again to get his specific reasons for why he believes the stuff he believes.

From what I remember about what he said about no planes, I THINK he said something about how the tv news stations video doesn't line up with each other and I THINK he said something about the one video clip that does that fade to black thing.

I THINK he also claimed some kind of evidence for the idea that nukes were placed under the WTC area (as a demolition plan in order to be allowed to build the towers) and under the Sears Tower (I don't remember the reason in the case of the Sears Tower or what evidence he had that there is/was a nuke under the Sears Tower).
 
CORed said:
Wrong again: The sonic boom is a wave front similar to the wake of a boat and is produced any time an object is traveling above the speed of sound. ...
Click to expand...

Our poor Russian politically appointed Intel officer has problems with science
911thology said:
Sonic boom is when the object reaches the sonic speed, not when it flies at surpersonic speeds. Go study physics first. If I am lier than no point to ask me anything. Go read Report of the 9/11 Commission instead.
Click to expand...
I flew supersonic jet trainers, the boom is happening the whole time you are supersonic; if not we would have slipped though the sound barrier (there is no barrier, you slip right through uneventfully and you don't hear anything in the jet!) and flown supersonic more and the sonic boom would not be so controlled over the USA!!! I am an engineer who studied physics, I am a pilot who studied flight dynamics, I worked in the Flight Dynamic Lab for the USAF; and you make up the delusion supersonic flight has not sonic-boom. You must of been a politically appointed intelligence officer with zero knowledge of science. Only made up delusions. Any kid who can google knows more about flying, nukes, and physics than you do.

You know as much about sonic booms as you know about nukes! ZERO, the null set, nothing, etc...

This was funny! you title the post answer
answer
Click to expand...
And you give out more false information.
911thology said:
Sonic boom is when the object reaches the sonic speed, not when it flies at surpersonic speeds.
Click to expand...

During Desert Storm I was outside dropping off aircrew to fly missions on the ramp when SCUDs attacked our base and the city. After the attack the supersonic trails of the SCUDs and Patriots were like "distant thunder" rumbling for as long as it took the paths' sonic booms to reach my ears; it was surrealistic as I listened to the BBC talking about the Gulf war and listening to the remnants of the supersonic engagement I just witnessed.
 
tj15 said:
I'd have to watch it again to get his specific reasons for why he believes the stuff he believes.
Click to expand...

Don't bother he never really says why he does.

tj15 said:
From what I remember about what he said about no planes, I THINK he said something about how the tv news stations video doesn't line up with each other and I THINK he said something about the one video clip that does that fade to black thing.
Click to expand...

I think his primary reason for not believing the planes hit the towers is that they should have bounced of (really he says this). He uses September Clues(less) to bolster his opinion.

tj15 said:
I THINK he also claimed some kind of evidence for the idea that nukes were placed under the WTC area (as a demolition plan in order to be allowed to build the towers) and under the Sears Tower (I don't remember the reason in the case of the Sears Tower or what evidence he had that there is/was a nuke under the Sears Tower).
Click to expand...

His reason was they had to do it (why he never said). His proof is that he is in the know and it is so. He says it was in the papers but never produces it as evidence.

I'm guessing if you want his evidence you have to purchase his book (and soon to be released companion DVD box set). :rolleyes:
 
beachnut said:
...
During Desert Storm I was outside dropping off aircrew to fly missions on the ramp when SCUDs attacked our base and the city. After the attack the supersonic trails of the SCUDs and Patriots were like "distant thunder" rumbling for as long as it took the paths' sonic booms to reach my ears; it was surrealistic as I listened to the BBC talking about the Gulf war and listening to the remnants of the supersonic engagement I just witnessed.
Click to expand...
.
I was wondering about that.
In WWII, the Tallboy bomb and the V-2 rocket were supersonic when coming down.
I expect that the sonic booms would have merged with the explosions and be regarded as secondaries at best.
Back when the Blackbirds were flying, the buildings at Flight Test would rattle nicely when they passed at 80,000 feet and Mach 3 or so.
The Mall rattles now when the Shuttle comes in from the southwest towards Edwards.
 
Does anyone have a good debunking of part 20 in the video series? It is about the seismic data. Can a person feel 2.1 and 2.3 seismic activity?
 
I Ratant said:
.
I was wondering about that.
In WWII, the Tallboy bomb and the V-2 rocket were supersonic when coming down.
I expect that the sonic booms would have merged with the explosions and be regarded as secondaries at best.
Back when the Blackbirds were flying, the buildings at Flight Test would rattle nicely when they passed at 80,000 feet and Mach 3 or so.
The Mall rattles now when the Shuttle comes in from the southwest towards Edwards.
Click to expand...

Back when the Concorde was still flying I there was some window rattling on the coast of Rhode Island beach houses very early in the morning. Seems that the pilots didn't always slow down as they were supposed to when they reached the coastline.
 
tj15 said:
Does anyone have a good debunking of part 20 in the video series? It is about the seismic data. Can a person feel 2.1 and 2.3 seismic activity?
Click to expand...

The seismic scale describes 2.0 to 3.0 as "Generally not felt, but recorded." There are thousands of such 'earthquakes' per day.
 
kookbreaker said:
The seismic scale describes 2.0 to 3.0 as "Generally not felt, but recorded." There are thousands of such 'earthquakes' per day.
Click to expand...

There is a quote from a guy who was at ground zero that said the ground was shaking and that it felt like a train going by underneath him (I THINK that's what he said). It is in part 20 of the video. The theory is that the guy would only feel something like that if the seismic activity registered between 5 and 6 on the richter scale (which is used as evidence for nukes exploding under the towers).
 
kookbreaker said:
The seismic scale describes 2.0 to 3.0 as "Generally not felt, but recorded." There are thousands of such 'earthquakes' per day.
Click to expand...
Considering the distance the recordings were made from I see no reason to believe however that a person at the site could feel the ground shake. The fire fighter refers to it as feeling like a "train under his feet". Not unlike when a truck passes my house I can feel it (and sometimes dishes rattle)

As far as "debunking" #20 goes there's really not much to say. He claims the seismic data is fake because it does not show the bombs going off (how's that for circular logic). A 5.7 shock that he does claim happened would be reported by everyone in NYC (and most of NJ)
 
Last edited:
CORed said:
I seriously doubt that 911thology knows this.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but I was trying to help him with his lie. I mean, really, if you're going to make up geiger-counter data, how hard is it to match the data to a known isotope with a known half life and say that you measured 1/4 the activity at 2 times the distance?

It's just that, the truthers are getting so lazy now. Where's the obfuscation? Where's the hidden factor of 10 that makes the math semi-plausible looking? Where are the carefully mined quotes with bold faced typing and strategically placed ellipses (...)?
 
kookbreaker said:
The seismic scale describes 2.0 to 3.0 as "Generally not felt, but recorded." There are thousands of such 'earthquakes' per day.
Click to expand...
.
It has to be a lot higher than 2,.. above 4, to be felt by me, and I've experienced many of them in the 40 some years here in CA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom