Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ho boy statistical impossibility and first time in history. Going around since 2001.

Last I checked, 1st time in history was a poor boys excuse to skip the research, luckily competent designers know they don't get second chances if they decide to be that rash when they have a building to design that'll be occupied.
 
AJM8125 said:
Yes. Terrorists using hijacked airliners to destroy buildings is unprecedented. You're showing progress.
Click to expand...
I agree... using hijacked airliners to destroy buildings is unprecedented, the knowledge that they could be used as such were not. Having said that, all the preventive measures that were put in place, failed.
 
ladmo said:
I agree... using hijacked airliners to destroy buildings is unprecedented, the knowledge that they could be used as such were not. Having said that, all the preventive measures that were put in place, failed.
Click to expand...
How do you prevent someone cutting your throat? What preventive measures are you talking about?
 
More than likely the warnings that came through before Clinton left office. As far as I understand some of that was lack of talk between the agencies, and others of that was lack of credible cause. Our security back then, and still now is far from perfect.

I don't think the evidence is there to back up LIHOP either frankly. Clinton definitely wouldn't have had much benefit leaving office that year
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
The Milky Way, where intelligent people believe their eyes to recognize danger.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html
Click to expand...

All of those are examples of fires burning at night.

Do you disagree that three seperate fires, on at least two different floors, that are burning and in fire talk considered a fully involved fire, is widespread?

Holy ****, I hope to FSM tht you're never allowed anywhere near a fire scene. You'll get people killed.
 
ladmo said:
I agree... using hijacked airliners to destroy buildings is unprecedented, the knowledge that they could be used as such were not. Having said that, all the preventive measures that were put in place, failed.
Click to expand...

Can you name some of these "preventitive measures"?
 
The disintegration of the World Trade Center buildings had to be accomplished by a well-planned, designed and engineered controlled demolition. Richard Gage does an excellent job in identifying key physical evidence to prove controlled demolition was used to destroy all three WTC towers. The evidence he presents can be intuitively grasped by ordinary people and should be even more convincing to engineers experienced with the physics and engineering mechanics.
 
walkyrie said:
The disintegration of the World Trade Center buildings had to be accomplished by a well-planned, designed and engineered controlled demolition. Richard Gage does an excellent job in identifying key physical evidence to prove controlled demolition was used to destroy all three WTC towers. The evidence he presents can be intuitively grasped by ordinary people and should be even more convincing to engineers experienced with the physics and engineering mechanics.
Click to expand...
Don't be ridiculous. Gage is a lying charlatan and no engineer of integrity will give his claims any credence.

As an engineer I can easily see how shallow his technical claims are. I can readily tell where he must know the truth and is deliberately trying to mislead.

And you cannot even match his level of mendacity. So if I don't fall for Gage's deceits there is no chance I would fall for yours. And the same goes for all the engineers and applied physicists posting here.
 
walkyrie said:
Richard Gage does an excellent job in identifying key physical evidence to prove controlled demolition was used to destroy all three WTC towers.
Click to expand...

Like when he dropped one cardboard box on top of another and argued that a 110-story skyscraper would behave the same way?

I must admit, that was the most wonderful moment in the history of modern civilization.
 
ozeco41 said:
Don't be ridiculous. Gage is a lying charlatan and no engineer of integrity will give his claims any credence.

As an engineer I can easily see how shallow his technical claims are. I can readily tell where he must know the truth and is deliberately trying to mislead.

And you cannot even match his level of mendacity. So if I don't fall for Gage's deceits there is no chance I would fall for yours. And the same goes for all the engineers and applied physicists posting here.
Click to expand...

Anyone with an ounce of brains realizes that someone who tries to compare two giant skyscrapers to cardboard boxes is instantly irrelevant and profoundly retarded. No degree necessary. :)
 
ladmo said:
I agree... using hijacked airliners to destroy buildings is unprecedented, the knowledge that they could be used as such were not. Having said that, all the preventive measures that were put in place, failed.
Click to expand...
Which preventive measures?
 
walkyrie said:
The disintegration of the World Trade Center buildings had to be accomplished by a well-planned, designed and engineered controlled demolition. Richard Gage does an excellent job in identifying key physical evidence to prove controlled demolition was used to destroy all three WTC towers. The evidence he presents can be intuitively grasped by ordinary people and should be even more convincing to engineers experienced with the physics and engineering mechanics.
Click to expand...
So you are of the cardboard box Toontown school of engineering. I wouldn't trust Gage to sit the right way round on a toilet.
 
Why are Jason Bermas and Alex Jones not affiliated with the newest LC? I know that movie came out a long time ago but I forgot about this up until now...
 
ergo said:
Walkyrie, one thing you'll find here is that every post you make will receive something in the range of 12 to 15 replies from different bedunkers. It takes them that many to actually address a point, and sometimes they don't even manage to do that. It's a little like being Gulliver. Just so you know. Try to find the most rational one (it can be hard) and respond to that. Ignore the others.
Click to expand...


Hey there Ergo, welcome back to the thread.

ARE YOU EVER GOING TO ADDRESS THIS POST????
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom