• 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.

Truth hypothesis

ImANiceGuy said:
My bold used to display his horribly poor comprehension.

What the hell kind of choices are you giving me here man?? I don't understand a thing you're asking...

somone help.....am I stupid?
Click to expand...

I think so.

Since the one affirmative claim you make seems to be that flight 93 was "shot down" (per the answers in bold/blue in post 94), maybe you could post a little evidence for that?
 
Telltale Tom said:

  • I think you will find proof of explosions at multiple levels on the ae911truth web site
Click to expand...


  • actually what you will find is proof <i>something</i> maybe exploding or something mistaken for explosions. the fact is that gage is ignorant enough in blueprint for cluster ******** (2008) to say that explosions and flashes cannot be accounted for by fire. however, if you go a'youtubin' and search "fire explosion" or "electrical fire" you will find dozens of examples of fires producing explosions and flashes. its been proven time and time again that he is either making it up as he goes or parroting some other idiot.

    the only way we can confirm explosives is by recording at collapse (where they definitely would be heard unmistakably), seismograph, or testing. we have all 3 of the above and NONE show signs of explosives being used.

    maybe i'll make a youtube video of the collapses with explosions put in them to show what we should hear alongside with what actually happened. proabably a bad idea though as some truther would probably chop it up and claim it was real.
 
Last edited:
Oystein said:
Generally speaking:
Do ultra-complex organisations function well? At all?
Do ultra-complex plans ever work out?


Give me an honest answer - that should end the discussion at once.
Click to expand...

:bump2
It is so very telling that you avoid a request for an honest answer like the devil avoids consecrated water.
 
well apparently the WTC buildings were designed like a muffler or silencer.

ctrackmongker:
Do you know how the WTC was constructed? Do you have a clue how a muffler is constructed? Do you have a clue how a silencer is constructed? I will give you a clue they all are a tube inside a tube allowing the sound waves to bounce off of the outer tube. So if only the core columns were blown

http://www.youtube.com/comment_servlet?all_comments&v=sRj3r0fBppI
Click to expand...
 
Hehe ok let's continue the game!
QUOTE=Oystein;5925326
Hehe ok let's continue the game!
QUOTE=Telltale Tom;5924134
  • Indeed, where DID S. Jones get the samples? The unconfirmed chain of custody is one of the cririque points raised against his shoddy paper[/QUOTE]
    Look he found a very unusual mixture of Al and Fe and when put together they could be thermite.
    He also found other explosives such as O and H and these two could have been indicators of other explosive gasses
    He also found traces of fire accelerants... a bit like jet fuel
    May I put the goal posts back to where they were? The point I raised was chain of custody. Problems with ~. Ya know? Whatever they found is somewhat devalued by the uncertainty about the origin of their samples.
    They may be devalued by the chain of costody but they are not worthless. All the government would need to do to prove us wrong is to dig up a new sample from Freshkills, as there was thermite in all the dust...Richard says so. . And that would be a new investigation in which case we win!. But until we get a new investigation the thermite sample found by Jones is the best in town.. Goooooooaaaaaalll !
  • Thermite is an incendiary and does not detonate in any fashion deemed useful by demolition experts
    That explains why there was no loud bangs
    Cool. When there are no loud bangs, it follows that thermite was used? Let's see... I am just back from my favourite Turkish restaurant where I fetched a kebap. I did not hear any loud bangs while they prepared it for me, so I conclude they fry their döner with thermite. Right? :p
    Well, you cant be sure can you and it depends if it was well done or not, but if you did a new investigation you may find out
  • The Jones, harriet ed.al. paper really does not proof they found thermite. The methods they used were not capable of producing such proof. If we assume methods to be valid, then the data in the paper would proof, on the contrary, that whatever they analyzed there could not possibly have been thermite. Therefore we can say with certainty that no thermite at all has been found.
    Thats not what they say
    Aight. That's why we say they err.
    Ah but there is doubt...
  • The tell-tale insanely loud cracking bangs of explosives at the moment of collapse initiation are conspicuously absent from any recordings and witness reports of the event. A minimum charge of 9 pounds high explosives would be needed to sever only one column, but all CD theories are based on the disbelief of CTers that a single column failure could bring down any of the buildings as neatly as the seemed to be.
    I think you will find proof of explosions at multiple levels on the ae911truth web site
    Show me!
    just go to www.ae911trtuh.com and look at the power points... explosions everywhere
  • If you put thermite or explosives into fire-protected boxes, that implies you can't bring them into ideal contact with the columns they are supposed to sever, which significantly increases the amount you need, and the force of the insanely loud bang associated with their detonation
    But you say thermite doesn't create a bang. Maybe it was special fire protection? Thats why we need a new investigation.
    Maybe it was fairies or the FSM or aliens from Beteigeuze. We definitely need a new investigation - no one tested for fairy dust!
    Excellent, another convert for the movement...you know where to sign up. We accept anyone that questions the official theory, wether you believe in faries of nukes !

it is clear to me that conversations like this have no end. This is what we have been doing for the last few years. I am sure it is as satisfying for you as it is for me. ... but truth will persevere, although it may be a long and very dull process.
 
Oystein said:
Do you think starting to mention Israel clarified anything?
Click to expand...

I've read through the thread again and I think your comprehension, or lack thereof is concerning...

It helps to follow the thread rather than simply regurgitating the usual crap...
 
ImANiceGuy said:
I'll start with something we certainly can all agree on. 4 planes crashed on 9/11. 2 into the towers, one into the pentagon, the other in a field.

Hypothesis: A cabal of global elites orchestrated an attack which served their geo-political/financial interests.

I'd be willing to extrapolate the hypothesis for any interested skeptics, as long as we can remain civil; please lets be civil.

I would like to stress that its JREF asking where all the truthers have gone, inviting us here for debate, etc. Don't be counter-productive and force me back to lurking status.
Click to expand...

You have zero evidence to support your hypothesis. Your hypothesis failed. You can't extrapolate the hypothesis with evidence or facts. You may be willing, but you are incapable of doing it in the real world.
 
ImANiceGuy said:
Hmmmm.....you want an honest answer?

Yes, complex organizations work well.
Click to expand...

I did not ask about complex organizations. I asked for ULTRA complex organizations.

(Complex organizations, by the way, are more often than not inefficient, partial failures and develop lose fringes - in a complex conspiracy, that would mean folks who blow their cover or di not perform at all. Your unconditional "yes" is plain silly)
 
beachnut said:
You have zero evidence to support your hypothesis. Your hypothesis failed. You can't extrapolate the hypothesis with evidence or facts. You may be willing, but you are incapable of doing it in the real world.
Click to expand...

Beachnut, your failed OCT stories are completely delusional. You need to turn down your music and read for comprehension...

Your opinion of my hypothesis is delusional also.
 
Oystein said:
I did not ask about complex organizations. I asked for ULTRA complex organizations.

(Complex organizations, by the way, are more often than not inefficient, partial failures and develop lose fringes - in a complex conspiracy, that would mean folks who blow their cover or di not perform at all. Your unconditional "yes" is plain silly)
Click to expand...

My apologies.

Honestly, an ultra-complex organization would also work; as demonstrated by the 9/11 Truth Movement...
 
ImANiceGuy said:
I've read through the thread again and I think your comprehension, or lack thereof is concerning...

It helps to follow the thread rather than simply regurgitating the usual crap...
Click to expand...

Losing an argument -> going to ad hominem attacks?
I am impressed! (not)

You proposed a theory with very little flesh, i asked you to put a little flesh to it, and you came up with a fuzzy global cabal of financial elites, in which for some unprovoked reason you chose to explicitly mention "the Israelis". There was no meinton of them in the thread before you introduced them in YOUR theory. I asked you why you specufically picked the Isrealis. You did not answer that. Please do so now.
 
ImANiceGuy said:
My apologies.

Honestly, an ultra-complex organization would also work; as demonstrated by the 9/11 Truth Movement...
Click to expand...

Urr fill me in here, as I must have missed something. So far I was under the impression that the 9/11 Truth Movement was not very organized at all, certainly not complex, and breathtakingly unsuccessful.

Generally speaking, the more complex an organization gets, the less likely it will work well. I say this after 10 years experience as a senior IT consultant.
 
Oystein said:
[abandoning useless argument with oystein, furthermore]... in which for some unprovoked reason you chose to explicitly mention "the Israelis". There was no meinton of them in the thread before you introduced them in YOUR theory. I asked you why you specufically picked the Isrealis. You did not answer that. Please do so now.
Click to expand...

See post #97 where I exactly answered that. My responses were in bold, maybe I should have pointed that out. I'll try to bullet point my responses for your convenience in the future.

EDIT: Just re-read my own answer and your reply and my only thought was please don't let this guy steer this towards "anti-semitism". I am not against people of any religion, ever.
 
Last edited:
Oystein said:
Urr fill me in here, as I must have missed something. So far I was under the impression that the 9/11 Truth Movement was not very organized at all, certainly not complex, and breathtakingly unsuccessful.

Generally speaking, the more complex an organization gets, the less likely it will work well. I say this after 10 years experience as a senior IT consultant.
Click to expand...
My bold

Should I generate an individual ticket for each question then, you seem to miss a lot...
 
ImANiceGuy said:
See post #97 where I exactly answered that. My responses were in bold, maybe I should have pointed that out. I'll try to bullet point my responses for your convenience in the future.
Click to expand...
.
Or, alternatively, you could learn to use the quote function properly...
.
 
TSR said:
.
Or, alternatively, you could learn to use the quote function properly...
.
Click to expand...

touche...

Anyway, if you want to have a little more fun picking my hypothesis apart, let's just keep the question to one at a time, and I will be able to give more in depth, specific answers which will, hopefully, satisfy a few of you.

Previously, I was asked a laundry list of vague, categorizing questions to which I replied briefly and vaguely...

Hypothesis: A cabal of global elites orchestrated an attack which served their geo-political/financial interests.

Finally, I reserve the right to alter or change my hypothesis at any time in light of new facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom