• 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.
BStrong said:
Close enough to get a master class clinic from Rocco - they were off about a three week rest, and everybody came to play that night. Brought Chester Thompson out at the end of the night and tore the roof off.

I understand the next night was just as good, but I was so beat from being up most of the night and going into work at 0600 that morning I was done in.
Click to expand...

I saw Janis Joplin once.
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
I don't want to give my qualifications not because I am ashamed of them..far...very far from it...I would like to not give any information for people to try and find out who I am.

As to what you said....there were no subsequent statements, at best he was saying...no one said they saw it or produced it....clearly the saw is a lie. A bold faced lie. I can think of only two mistakes I made well really one...I came on to strong with saying 767 could be modified...I was really saying the blueprints were pretty much there. The other saying that there had not been a single arrest as it related to 9/11 on U.S soil. Someone pointed out moussaoui...I corrected myself saying the vast majority of arrests were not on U.S soil, but the essence of my point remains largely intact. that is you have a crime the magnitude of 9/11 and almost no one is arrested in the country it took place in....seems odd to me.
Click to expand...

Bolding mine. Fred Greening might be shocked to hear you say that. :rolleyes:
 
bill smith said:
This is the normal style here. They try to wear you down by force of numbers.You can explain something in full and three posts later they will ask the same question, Bullying in other words. Don't let them get to you.
Click to expand...
Said bill, to the guy who keeps asserting the FBI had "no evidence" of bin Laden's involvement after being informed otherwise repeatedly.
 
dafydd said:
A truther making a mistake? Surely not!
Click to expand...

I like how his research skills allowed that mistake to happen 7 times, and after it was pointed out, he corrected it the next time he stated Dr. Greening's name as if he had been right all along.
 
Disbelief said:
I like how his research skills allowed that mistake to happen 7 times, and after it was pointed out, he corrected it the next time he stated Dr. Greening's name as if he had been right all along.
Click to expand...

So truthers have the same attitude to history as the Ministry Of Truth in 1984.
 
WTC Dust said:
Richard Gage is wrong
Click to expand...

Hey you FINALLY got something right.

, but I'm not. I'm telling you there were neither bombs nor planes to disturb the bombs.
Click to expand...

all this proves you are as nuts or more so than Jones. His theory is at least theoretically possible even if its impossible in practice, but yours is simply impossible. Period.

First the planes were filmed from around 43 different angles and witnessed by tens of thousands of people. It simply is not possible to project an image in a clear blue very sunny sky. There is nothing to reflect the image off and no light source powerful enough to do so. So there were Planes. Explosives? no almost certainly not but there certainly were at least two very large explosions when the planes hit the towers and again the second was caught on dozens of camera in hi Def. Again projecting the images and sound plus the damage into a clear sky is physically impossible (ie its not possible in physics no matter how high tech you get)
Next the buildings burn for a hour or so and then collapse exactly as they would if they had been hit by a plane and allowed to burn. the failure starts where the planes hit and the building fall apart as they collapse. There is no directional beam visible, no direction beam effects, no weird injuries to people inside the towers who survived, the steel all survived...much of it in large easily identifiable sections....I was there I saw it!

So you have no credible evidence, an impossible theory and not a single sane person and even few truthers agree with you.

Now if you had but an ounce of sanity and self respect left you would grasp that it you thats wrong and the rest of the world is right and you would seek appropriate treatment. You might well find that what makes so much sense to you now looks utterly bizarre when you recover. Best of luck....you need it.
 
sheeplesnshills said:
Hey you FINALLY got something right.



all this proves you are as nuts or more so than Jones. His theory is at least theoretically possible even if its impossible in practice, but yours is simply impossible. Period.

First the planes were filmed from around 43 different angles and witnessed by tens of thousands of people. It simply is not possible to project an image in a clear blue very sunny sky. There is nothing to reflect the image off and no light source powerful enough to do so. So there were Planes. Explosives? no almost certainly not but there certainly were at least two very large explosions when the planes hit the towers and again the second was caught on dozens of camera in hi Def. Again projecting the images and sound plus the damage into a clear sky is physically impossible (ie its not possible in physics no matter how high tech you get)
Next the buildings burn for a hour or so and then collapse exactly as they would if they had been hit by a plane and allowed to burn. the failure starts where the planes hit and the building fall apart as they collapse. There is no directional beam visible, no direction beam effects, no weird injuries to people inside the towers who survived, the steel all survived...much of it in large easily identifiable sections....I was there I saw it!

So you have no credible evidence, an impossible theory and not a single sane person and even few truthers agree with you.

Now if you had but an ounce of sanity and self respect left you would grasp that it you thats wrong and the rest of the world is right and you would seek appropriate treatment. You might well find that what makes so much sense to you now looks utterly bizarre when you recover. Best of luck....you need it.
Click to expand...

Tut tut. Introducing reality into her fantasy world again. You know it upsets her.
 
000063 said:
Said bill, to the guy who keeps asserting the FBI had "no evidence" of bin Laden's involvement after being informed otherwise repeatedly.
Click to expand...

In all honesty, as I posted earlier, the F.B.I. didn't investigate OBL's involvment in 9/11 - the DOJ already had 2 earlier indictments w/o resolution -and although I have no proof to support this, I believe that having two indictments on the table discouraged the further expenditure of resources.

As far as being informed goes, that would be a good starting point to build a case and investigate and develop hard evidence, but again, no further investigation took place that I'm aware of.

OBL's death put an end to it all in any case, so what's done is done.
 
Last edited:
BStrong said:
November 20, 1973 I saw The Who at the Cow Palace the night Moonie passed out and they played the last couple of songs withn a drummer out of the audience - greatest moment in rock imo.
Click to expand...

I had a drink with Keith Moon at the bar in Sophia Gardens,Cardiff in 1970. A mate of mine was a roadie for the Who on that tour. Everything you have read about Moonie is true, They don't make them like that any more.
 
dafydd said:
I had a drink with Keith Moon at the bar in Sophia Gardens,Cardiff in 1970. A mate of mine was a roadie for the Who on that tour. Everything you have read about Moonie is true, They don't make them like that any more.
Click to expand...

When they made Moon, they broke the mold, and then beat the hell out of the mold maker.

I first saw the Who in '68 and that pretty much was it as far as I was concerned.

Salud! to you for lifting a drink with him
 
BStrong said:
When they made Moon, they broke the mold, and then beat the hell out of the mold maker.

I first saw the Who in '68 and that pretty much was it as far as I was concerned.

Salud! to you for lifting a drink with him
Click to expand...

I've bumped into a few rock stars in my time. I once appeared in a pageant with Peter Gabriel. that's another story,back on topic. What was it again? Truthers are much of a muchness ,it gets hazy now and again.
 
Without enough of the floor steel reconstructed, the initial conditions for the model are screwed up.

When the engine and landing gear go through the building (in the real world), NIST had a very difficult time getting the the model to do that. Most of the time the building (model) collapses immediately. With a proper reconstruction of the floors, they could have made a much more robust model.

NIST researchers are government employees working for pathological liars. They actually did a good job of presenting their doubts, but they were buried in the spin machine.

Samples of the steel for metallurgical properties showed sulfur as an active contaminate. This could have occurred in the ground, or after the fire and before the collapse.

Then again the steel from the affected floors could have proved sabotage, if it had been recovered.

To be blunt you are showing incredible ignorance of computer modeling, this was not a generic exercise on whether a fire can collapse a building like the WTC towers. It is whether these specific buildings fell solely because of impact damage and fire. Recovery of the steel from the floors is critical for a specific model to erase most rational doubts.

Either way the lack of floor steel did not allow a model, or argument that would remove all serious doubt.
 
Ah, the dancing Israeli's another example of the Imperial Bush's Total Information control.

The answer is simple.

They either had local image storage, or they didn't. That means that they had film or tape OR they could only send an image (satellite or local feed), but not retain any images.

If they had film, then all you need to do is look at the film. If they are filming before the first impact, then that is really bad.

If they don't have film or tape, (the smart way), they can send the entire sequence (including before the impact) by radio waves and they are not carrying anything that will incriminate themselves.

The Naudet film is disturbing, because I don't think the camera operator can see the path of the plane.

After the plane passes, the cameraman pauses, and then locks on to the World Trade Center and he is NOT tracking the plane. Staging the shot. It also appears that an individual in the background (of the scene where they are sniffing for gas in the middle of the street) is giving hand signals to the camera man.

The Naudet film takes about 2 days to get to the Networks. It probably needed some editing.

The FBI at the WTC is completely controlled by Pasquale D'Amuro, his boss Dale Watson and a FBI Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence chain of command that has been (politically or ideologically) compromised. They were barely competent enough to get Robert Hanssen.

You know the scene in Apocalypse Now, where Robert Duvall says he loves the smell of napalm in the morning, there really are dangerous people like that. The pot smoking Neo-Nazi's are easy to spot, the ones with the discipline, control. and talent are a 1000 times more dangerous.

Again if there had been film or tape in the camera of the dancing Israeli's, that could have answered everything. Why would they keep the answers from us? That is why they are called pathological liars.

Even if the FBI looked at it ( Hey, I thought you looked at it?) No one (In the FBI) likes to look stupid demanding to see the film or tape.

But ask the FBI for anything about 9-11, they (The FBI), will literally fight you to the Supreme Court, where I can guarantee you (that if it is truly damning evidence), that they will get the Supreme Court to back them up.

But that was then, and this is now. You think something would have changed since then.

This is just some incredibly detailed paranoid delusion. If I have a hard time falling asleep, I just try to evade my (nonexistent) surveillance, and the next morning I wake up, kinda bruised, but refreshed, after the dart wears off. Wow, no white jackets, no fences or locked doors, just like I am a normal person.

Kill the wabbit, kill the wabbit.
 
DeathDart said:
Without enough of the floor steel reconstructed, the initial conditions for the model are screwed up.

When the engine and landing gear go through the building (in the real world), NIST had a very difficult time getting the the model to do that. Most of the time the building (model) collapses immediately. With a proper reconstruction of the floors, they could have made a much more robust model.

NIST researchers are government employees working for pathological liars. They actually did a good job of presenting their doubts, but they were buried in the spin machine.

Samples of the steel for metallurgical properties showed sulfur as an active contaminate. This could have occurred in the ground, or after the fire and before the collapse.

Then again the steel from the affected floors could have proved sabotage, if it had been recovered.

To be blunt you are showing incredible ignorance of computer modeling, this was not a generic exercise on whether a fire can collapse a building like the WTC towers. It is whether these specific buildings fell solely because of impact damage and fire. Recovery of the steel from the floors is critical for a specific model to erase most rational doubts.

Either way the lack of floor steel did not allow a model, or argument that would remove all serious doubt.
Click to expand...

I use the full scale model to see how the WTC would collapse when fire systems, fire insulation is removed, and 10,000 gallons/66,000 pounds of jet fuel starts fires in one second on multiple floors in the WTC. We see impacts, fires, learn the fires systems were destroyed and fire insulation was removed by the massive kinetic energy impact equal to 1300 and 2000 pounds of TNT. Big impact, and for 911 truth, no ability to grasp what took place. Towers burned, and fell. Big full scale models. You have no clue what the goal of NIST was as you blindly attack models due to your lack of knowledge.

When you make posts like this, you expose your lack of knowledge in engineer system, and a lack of knowledge pertaining to models. Bad form to let everyone know you have no clue. You don't have rational doubt, you have doubt based on your fantasy claims, ignorance, lies you adopted from 911 truth and delusions. You have delusional claims on how things should work and can't do the math required to do a simple model yourself. A lack of knowledge is your problem and does not mean engineers and laypeople who can grasp engineering concepts, physics and math have doubts that fire can destroy the strength of steel and cause what happen on 911.

woodsteelfire.jpg

wood beats steel in fire
bet we can guess why steel is insulated against fire

There are few fringe nut case engineers who agree with you, and have the same evidence as you do on 911, and Bigfoot supporters for Bigfoot. Cheer up, 0.01 percent of all engineers agree with your delusions on 911. You are not alone with the crazy claims; albeit, you have those engineers at a rate less than insanity. Think if it as a select few insane engineers share your opinions on 911.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
You have no clue what the goal of NIST was as you blindly attack models due to your lack of knowledge.

Bigfoot supporters for Bigfoot. Cheer up, 0.01 percent of all engineers.
Click to expand...

The goal of NIST was to burn up time and to humor their insane bosses.

I don't believe in bigfoot.

You are incorrect about 0.01 percent of all engineers. In most areas (After a 2 to 4 year learning curve) I can beat 70-80% of engineers. Some engineers are so good (in their fields), that I will never beat them.

From time to time, I can be better than 0.01 percent of all engineers, then I tell them what I have learned, and they leave me in the dust, again.

I don't have a blinding full spectrum intellect, but I can find things no else can. I live on the fringes, where it is not so crowded. Sometimes you can actually be the first person to ever turn over that particular rock.

But I would guess that you haven't turned over any rocks lately.

You are so certain about what is under every single rock.
 
DeathDart said:
Ah, the dancing Israeli's another example of the Imperial Bush's Total Information control.

The answer is simple.

They either had local image storage, or they didn't. That means that they had film or tape OR they could only send an image (satellite or local feed), but not retain any images.

If they had film, then all you need to do is look at the film. If they are filming before the first impact, then that is really bad.

If they don't have film or tape, (the smart way), they can send the entire sequence (including before the impact) by radio waves and they are not carrying anything that will incriminate themselves.

The Naudet film is disturbing, because I don't think the camera operator can see the path of the plane.

After the plane passes, the cameraman pauses, and then locks on to the World Trade Center and he is NOT tracking the plane. Staging the shot. It also appears that an individual in the background (of the scene where they are sniffing for gas in the middle of the street) is giving hand signals to the camera man.

The Naudet film takes about 2 days to get to the Networks. It probably needed some editing.

The FBI at the WTC is completely controlled by Pasquale D'Amuro, his boss Dale Watson and a FBI Counterterrorism and Counterintelligence chain of command that has been (politically or ideologically) compromised. They were barely competent enough to get Robert Hanssen.

You know the scene in Apocalypse Now, where Robert Duvall says he loves the smell of napalm in the morning, there really are dangerous people like that. The pot smoking Neo-Nazi's are easy to spot, the ones with the discipline, control. and talent are a 1000 times more dangerous.

Again if there had been film or tape in the camera of the dancing Israeli's, that could have answered everything. Why would they keep the answers from us? That is why they are called pathological liars.

Even if the FBI looked at it ( Hey, I thought you looked at it?) No one (In the FBI) likes to look stupid demanding to see the film or tape.

But ask the FBI for anything about 9-11, they (The FBI), will literally fight you to the Supreme Court, where I can guarantee you (that if it is truly damning evidence), that they will get the Supreme Court to back them up.

But that was then, and this is now. You think something would have changed since then.

This is just some incredibly detailed paranoid delusion. If I have a hard time falling asleep, I just try to evade my (nonexistent) surveillance, and the next morning I wake up, kinda bruised, but refreshed, after the dart wears off. Wow, no white jackets, no fences or locked doors, just like I am a normal person.

Kill the wabbit, kill the wabbit.
Click to expand...

In this video note the way the Naudet brother gets WTC2 pretty much centre screen . Even when the jet starts to roar behind and above him he is not distracted from his rapt filming of the blank undamaged but momentarily to be struck face of WTC2.He is apparently deaf, very brave and dedicated or knew that the plane was coming. Watch the camera suddenly go rock-steady to catch the critical moments..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUT7yup-YIg&NR=1
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom