• 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.

Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
sylvan8798 said:
Your attempts to sound biblical just come off as comical. Aren't you getting impatient as we near ten years since 9/11?
Click to expand...

That is good, it was meant to be comical.
(potentially just criminal actions and not a conspiracy)

Some impatience, yes, though it could be worse. Compared to the passage of time for the conspirators. Their nuts are in a slowly tightening vise, the passage of time that they are experiencing is so much (enjoyably) slower.

Even if there is not an actual (and separate) 9-11 conspiracy, there have been so many crimes committed, that scores of people will be going to prison for a very long time. Just because a corrupted DOJ said it was legal, does not mean that the people who wrote those opinions are off the hook. A hook, how delicious.

If there is a 9-11 conspiracy, then I will need to be learning how to dance, on fresh turned earth.
 
Scott Sommers said:
No, no, no...you have it all wrong. I'm watching Mercury Rising with Bruce Willis and he's an FBI agent. Even he ends up on the run with no one listening to him because THEY are so powerful. If it's anything like this, you'd have to be Neo to take them on. Maybe DeathDart and his friends are THE ONE brave enough to take THEM on. I'm so looking forward to hearing more about how they're going to do it.
Click to expand...

I am one of many.

I am no longer running.

They WERE powerful .
 
chrismohr said:
. Both sides may be surprised by what I say:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LnYfB4OaDM
Click to expand...

I can't say I was surprised at all. Your "10 questions" list shows that you are open to their concerns but they have to show they are legitimate,.Basicly you're asking what we have for years, PROVE IT!

I have not had the time as of late to watch all of your work, I plan to soon.

Although I don't really agree that you needed to go to these depths to "debunk" Gage, I now think that your work might be important to sway the fence sitters. I regretfully have to say that this is not the target audience for Gage. I believe he truly wants the hard-core that is willing to part with money. I've been to his show and I firmly believe this is all he's interested in.


Good job.


:)
 
bill smith said:
Hi JD,
Long time no see. Never let it be said that I don't back up what I say.

( I hope that answering your question still conforms to the general and non-specific nature of this thread,)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm-v-DElAZg
Click to expand...

Hi bill.
Well the voice (and I assume its Robertson) does say that when down there a "little river" of stell was flowing.

Now I must wonder how Robertson identified the substance as "steel" rather than some other metal and exactly what constituted a "little river".(a steady drip? a 1 cm wide running flow? a 25 cm wide flow?)
 
DGM said:
But, the laymen in the "truth" movement say it "obvious". Is it not "obvious" to people in the industry?
Click to expand...

bill smith said:
Richard Gage, just as most of the other architects and engineers in the US and Europe took what they saw on TV and heard from the talking heads at face value. That iis mostly the case to this day

This is why such a small percentage of engineers and architects are signed up to Richard's cause. That would change- massively- if they were fully informed of the salient details.
Click to expand...



I do not have time right now to read all the responses since I was last on the forum but this is what strikes me as odd.

Many in the 911 conspiracy camp are quite vociferous at telling us that it is "obvious" that the towers and #7 were demolitions , to the point of saying that simply watching them come down proves it.

Now bill here is saying that this is not the case and that one must listen to all the evidence that Gage has before coming to this conclusion, even if one's steady job is construction of large steel structures.

How do these two camps reconcile the difference?
 
Clayton Moore said:
It isn't a secret. The MSM is ignoring it. Dime to a dollar we will eventually be told of a much bigger threat and that 9/11 was a sacrifice that had to be made.
Click to expand...

If what you are saying is that eventually we will be told 'the truth' about the cause of the destruction and that this truth is more aligned with what you believe than with what I believe then I'll take your dollar.
 
twinstead said:
You watch too many movies
Click to expand...

I would hate to write the script for this movie. I used to think it was a simple top down conspiracy.

It is more like 5 or 6 people fighting over who gets to steer a giant bulldozer as it plows through several countries, generally screwing up everything in sight.

George W. Bush may have become our first Caesar, except that without the Military, he could not make it permanent. Obama probably picked one of the worse times, in the last 80 years, to become POTUS. Bad for him, though it looks like it could be good for America.

Yes, I know that history has only recently opened the door for a black president. It is just a bad time to be president, if you really give a rats ass.
 
Craig4 said:
Are you going to produce some evidence of either a controlled demolition or a conspiracy by anyone other than Al Qaida members to conduct the attacks on 9/11? How about explaining your math from a few pages ago? You haven't done that yet either.
Click to expand...

tower_exploding_2730.jpg
[/IMG]

That looks like explosives to me.
 
Looks like a collapsing building to me. (And the rest of the planet)

FYI - explosives could not have done that. Physically impossible.
 
Last edited:
DeathDart said:
I would hate to write the script for this movie. I used to think it was a simple top down conspiracy.

It is more like 5 or 6 people fighting over who gets to steer a giant bulldozer as it plows through several countries, generally screwing up everything in sight.

George W. Bush may have become our first Caesar, except that without the Military, he could not make it permanent. Obama probably picked one of the worse times, in the last 80 years, to become POTUS. Bad for him, though it looks like it could be good for America.

Yes, I know that history has only recently opened the door for a black president. It is just a bad time to be president, if you really give a rats ass.
Click to expand...

Oddly, I agree with the basic thrust of this post, and your last 2 paragraphs are right on the money as far as I'm concerned -- the 2008 election looked to me like the Republicans didn't WANT to win, they wanted the Democrats to clean up the Bush/Cheney train wreck, in much teh same way Clinton cleaned up after the Reagan/Bush era.

As far as 6 guys driving a bulldozer, I imagine the "powers that be" as a big table with a couple hundred people who hate one another attempting to play poker, chess and tarot all at the same time. Rather than being 1 big conspiracy to rule the world, there are hundreds of little conspiracies with shifting alliances, but very long term plans.
 
NoahFence said:
Looks like a collapsing building to me. (And the rest of the planet)

FYI - explosives could not have done that. Physically impossible.
Click to expand...

Reverse the problem.
They wanted to create as many deaths as possible, then the buildings must collapse.

If you did have a good model for the impacts and the fuel, do the buildings always collapse? If nearly every model shows that it will usually collapse, then explosives or building modifications are not necessary.

This is where the NIST model is important. It could have been optimized for using one of the national supercomputer centers. Then again it could also be a really bogus simulation. If it was any good, some volunteers could try to use a Beowulf cluster, or something else to run it.

If the model never collapses until you enter, what everyone agrees are ridiculous variables, then we have an objective basis for conspiracy.

Computer power has come a long way since 9-11, and since shrub is not guarding it any longer, the program might be obtainable.
 
ApolloGnomon said:
Oddly, I agree with the basic thrust of this post, and your last 2 paragraphs are right on the money as far as I'm concerned -- the 2008 election looked to me like the Republicans didn't WANT to win, they wanted the Democrats to clean up the Bush/Cheney train wreck, in much teh same way Clinton cleaned up after the Reagan/Bush era.

As far as 6 guys driving a bulldozer, I imagine the "powers that be" as a big table with a couple hundred people who hate one another attempting to play poker, chess and tarot all at the same time. Rather than being 1 big conspiracy to rule the world, there are hundreds of little conspiracies with shifting alliances, but very long term plans.
Click to expand...

Well said, better than the way I had described it.
 
DeathDart said:
Reverse the problem.
They wanted to create as many deaths as possible, then the buildings must collapse.

If you did have a good model for the impacts and the fuel, do the buildings always collapse? If nearly every model shows that it will usually collapse, then explosives or building modifications are not necessary.

This is where the NIST model is important. It could have been optimized for using one of the national supercomputer centers. Then again it could also be a really bogus simulation. If it was any good, some volunteers could try to use a Beowulf cluster, or something else to run it.

If the model never collapses until you enter, what everyone agrees are ridiculous variables, then we have an objective basis for conspiracy.

Computer power has come a long way since 9-11, and since shrub is not guarding it any longer, the program might be obtainable.
Click to expand...

Don't need computers to figure out 911. It is not the computer that models things, it is people, people that understand math, physics, engineering; all the things 911 truth fails to use as tools to comprehend 911.

The WTC towers were designed to handle an aircraft impact at 180 mph. The impacts on 911 were 7 and 11 times greater. The design would effectively repel an impact at 180 mph.

Imagine you can survive being hit by a car at a certain energy level, what would happen when the energy level is 7 to 11 times greater?

What will you do when you gain the knowledge to comprehend what happen on 911? Right now you are wasting your time spreading false claims and delusions, what is your back up plan?
 
beachnut said:
Don't need computers to figure out 911. It is not the computer that models things, it is people, people that understand math, physics, engineering; all the things 911 truth fails to use as tools to comprehend 911.

The WTC towers were designed to handle an aircraft impact at 180 mph. The impacts on 911 were 7 and 11 times greater. The design would effectively repel an impact at 180 mph.

Imagine you can survive being hit by a car at a certain energy level, what would happen when the energy level is 7 to 11 times greater?

What will you do when you gain the knowledge to comprehend what happen on 911? Right now you are wasting your time spreading false claims and delusions, what is your back up plan?
Click to expand...

Where did you get the aircraft at 180mph information?
Then you support the idea that the buildings should have collapsed immediately after impact. They did not.
 
DeathDart said:
Where did you get the aircraft at 180mph information?
Then you support the idea that the buildings should have collapsed immediately after impact. They did not.
Click to expand...

Beachnut also doesn't believe the Titanic sank. After all, she was designed to be unsinkable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom