The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job

Patriots4Truth said:
a different topic - but that is exactly my point about Nist claiming that some floor trusses in WTC1 "sagged" 9ft in 17 minutes.
Click to expand...
But that is only because you are not a rational person. You are an irrational person who drank the thermite kool-aid.
 
Patriots4Truth said:
no it was a serious question. do you not care about why Nist says WTC1 collapse initiated? because it sure looks like it
Click to expand...
I'm quite sure that everyone here knows far more about it than you do. I bet you think the "official story" is that the jet fuel melted the steel or something equally distant from reality.
 
WildCat said:
I'm quite sure that everyone here knows far more about it than you do. I bet you think the "official story" is that the jet fuel melted the steel or something equally distant from reality.
Click to expand...

Give him credit...he actually used the word "sagged". I am just waiting for the argument from incredulity.
 
triforcharity said:
Do you not realize that a HUGE ****** explosion happened? It didn't need to "bounce". An explosion that size could very well send a small paper booklet flying in another direction.
Click to expand...
Do you not realize that the fuel vaporized and exploded after the airplane entered the building? Now we just need to know how the fuel overcame the passport without leaving a droplet on it. And we need to know how the passport escaped the fast expanding fireball. And we need to know what descelerated the passport while the rest of the airplane headed further south.

...or simply face the reality.
 
Patriots4Truth said:
I don't know. Do you care about the foundation of Nist's report or do you just repeat the parts you like?
Click to expand...
I have never relied on the accuracy of conclusions in the NIST reports, rather used NIST, if I needed to, as a source of evidence from which I could form my own conclusions,

The reason I took that path from 2007 onwards and on another forum was that many discussions would get lost between (at least) two objectives. viz:
  • Answer the WTC Twin Towers 9/11 question of "demolition or not"; OR
  • Prove NIST wrong.
Where "prove NIST wrong" was a convenient evasion path for those we then called "conspiracy theorists". Cut that path out to force the discussion to remain on "demolition or not".

Didn't always work of course....:rolleyes:
 
achimspok said:
Do you not realize that the fuel vaporized and exploded after the airplane entered the building? Now we just need to know how the fuel overcame the passport without leaving a droplet on it. And we need to know how the passport escaped the fast expanding fireball. And we need to know what descelerated the passport while the rest of the airplane headed further south.

...or simply face the reality.
Click to expand...

Why what does the passport prove?

According to your wind vortex theory Im sure it fluttered around the building up and down (evidence of no fire right?)
 
ozeco41 said:
I have never relied on the accuracy of conclusions in the NIST reports, rather used NIST, if I needed to, as a source of evidence from which I could form my own conclusions,

The reason I took that path from 2007 onwards and on another forum was that many discussions would get lost between (at least) two objectives. viz:
  • Answer the WTC Twin Towers 9/11 question of "demolition or not"; OR
  • Prove NIST wrong.
Where "prove NIST wrong" was a convenient evasion path for those we then called "conspiracy theorists". Cut that path out to force the discussion to remain on "demolition or not".

Didn't always work of course....:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

well, why did the perimeter columns bow inwards 55 inches (NCSTAR 1-6D, pg 314) if not for the amazing account of 9 feet of sagging in 17 minutes?
 
Last edited:
LightningTeg said:
Once again achimspok, what the hell is the point of all this rambling and shotgunning of random evidence? Jarrah* Put the plane to the ground when the plane started to be overun by passengers. Probably a much steeper AOA then 10 deg. And why would he respond to ATC?
Click to expand...
Oh, you didn't got the argument?
Read the nonsense about the bouncing Satam Al Suqami passport and you might understand the wrong Flight 1771 argument.

Btw, 10° over vertical is much steeper than 10°. You should read first instead of trying to be the first one who replies some more nonsense.
 
LightningTeg said:
Why what does the passport prove?

According to your wind vortex theory Im sure it fluttered around the building up and down (evidence of no fire right?)
Click to expand...
It should prove the existence of 19 phantoms who managed to be in several locations at the very same time while using allegedly stolen identities.

Btw, do you know the difference between 9m/s and 200m/s?
Your "flutter" argument shows nothing but you have no clue.
 
achimspok said:
Do you not realize that the fuel vaporized and exploded after the airplane entered the building? Now we just need to know how the fuel overcame the passport without leaving a droplet on it. And we need to know how the passport escaped the fast expanding fireball. And we need to know what descelerated the passport while the rest of the airplane headed further south.

...or simply face the reality.
Click to expand...
This is why you don't understand 911, you don't understand reality. How is your delusion on demolition coming? How does 77 fit in your failed world of woo?

What about flight 93, another passport and some other papers survived.

Do you store your passport in a fuel tank? Your paranoid conspiracy theories meddle with reality. How many aircraft accidents have you investigated?

Why can't a passport survive? I have investigated accident where things survive. Why can't a low mass object survive? Why is 911 truth void of physics?

Use physics to show why a passport can't survive an impact of 11 or 175, 93, or 77. Go ahead, make your day, do some differential equations, prove it can't happen. Prove what I have witnessed many time, prove it can't happen.

BTW, the passports are not needed to prove who the terrorists were, they left a trail like dead people leave when they commit suicide and left their stuff behind. We have some of their DNA, your buddies you apologize for, we have some of their DNA; are you coming to collect it soon?

Got some math to go with you false claims and moronic delusions of what can't happen?
 
Last edited:
achimspok said:
It should prove the existence of 19 phantoms who managed to be in several locations at the very same time while using allegedly stolen identities.
Click to expand...

What the **** are you talking about? Who says the were at several locations at the same time? Who says they used stolen identities?
 
Patriots4Truth said:
well, why did the perimeter columns bow inwards 55 inches (NCSTAR 1-6D, pg 314) if not for the amazing account of 9 feet of sagging in 17 minutes?
Click to expand...
It is observable fact that the perimeter columns bowed inwards. Whether NIST's explanation is correct or not does not change the inwards bowing.

The inwards bowing contributed to failure - initial collapse. There is no need for the NIST explanation at that point.

So, clarifying the objective, my two objectives have been (1) To answer "Demolition or not?" and (2) To explain the collapses to lay persons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom