Adventures with AE911truth

[scissorhands]

No one stays on the AE911truth as an eng or architect unless we see their diploma so if you see an "IP Nightly" listed its only temporary.

You guys can stop using fake names because they don't get up there.

BTW There can be a $10,000.00 fine for representing yourself as an engineer.

Your site is a scam Doug, a scam site run by scammers, dont get all uppity now its been pointed out to you.
Richard Gage is well aware its a scam, why arent you?

 

[Corsair 115]

With typical twoofer accuracy he's referring to the 1993 bombing, not 1997, and no, there is no proof of anything but an attack by Islamic radicals.

It's especially curious since the 7 is nowhere near the 3 on a keyboard, either along the top or on the number pad - this makes a typing mistake unlikely.

 

[Gravy]

Just the title of your thread "Debunking Conspiracy Theories" shows your level of mental capability - it implies that there are no such thing as conspiracies. Of course conspiracies exist - even evil conspiracies.

This is a forum for discussing conspiracy theories. Where can I find this thread titled "Debunking Conspiracy Theories," or is that another figment of your imagination?

And if there were a thread titled "Debunking Conspiracy Theories," how would that indicate a denial of actual conspiracies?

Here are some links that will help you learn about logic and critical thinking.

 

[~enigma~]

With typical twoofer accuracy he's referring to the 1993 bombing, not 1997, and no, there is no proof of anything but an attack by Islamic radicals.

Yes but being called a liar by a guy who can't even get his dates straight is kind of odd

 

[DGM]

With typical twoofer accuracy he's referring to the 1993 bombing, not 1997, and no, there is no proof of anything but an attack by Islamic radicals.

He's probably referring to the '97 test run of the hush bombs. The tape will be on their DVD for $9.95

 

[JimBenArm]

Lets be clear about why I will not debate any of you debunkers:

Because you're an intellectual coward, I'm guessing.

You lie. You misrepresent your qualifications. You support the officials lies and ignore obvious fact, but most of all YOU LIE all the time.

Really? Point out one time I lied here. Waiting...

Peter Weaver you lied and said you were a degreed engineer. You lose right there.

Don't know or care who this is. What does this have to do with anything.

I have spent many hours argueing 9/11 on sites like this. The science that gets introduced is always incorrect, sometimes laughable.

Really? Such as...?

But you don't need to be an architect or structural engineer to know that 9/11 was an inside job. All you have to do is READ THE FEMA REPORT !!!

Which you haven't, or didn't understand.

Its right there in black and white:


(1) Sulfidization of steel that could not be explained

(2) The supports that would have to fail could not have

(3) They admit that their theories had only a very "low probability of occurance"

So, where is your science-based alternative? Oh, right, haven't got one, because science is laughable...

Also, its been shown that wtc'97 was an inside job with leaked tapes.

Leaky tapes were the culprit? And strange how I didn't hear about a bombing in '97...

Its a matter of congressional testimony that the bombs described in the official version of the OKC bombing could not have done the damage. Mainstream reported bombs inside the building after the blasts. Lee Harvey Oswald did not shoot JFK.

All of which are stupid, and have nada to do with 9/11. Guess all someone has to do is say "Conspiracy!" and you believe it.

I have no interest in anything but honest debate and its impossible to debate 9/11 theories with dupporters of the official version. Even PM, Nova, BBC & NIST misrepresented the construction of the buildings wrt strength & size of central core.

Let me guess. You believe there was a concrete core, a la ChristopherA.
Hoo boy, here we go again...

As far as the architect that said he would debate anyone, anytime on 9/11 conspiracy theories, I don't believe him. I've debated too many structural engineers and watched my fellow truthers with no scientific background make mincemeat out of their arguements using facts from the incident.

Uh huh, sure you have. In other words, you're too afraid to be shown up by someone with actual, relevent knowledge and training. Sorry, but if you're not going to have the stones to back up what you say, don't waste our time, coward.

Go head...debunk away.

Done.

And by one of the third-stringers here, no less!

Man, it sucks to be you!

 

[DGM]

I have spent many hours argueing 9/11 on sites like this. The science that gets introduced is always incorrect, sometimes laughable.

I've debated too many structural engineers and watched my fellow truthers with no scientific background make mincemeat out of their arguements using facts from the incident.

If you won't debate us, could you at least give us the links to these debates so we could see your brilliance in action?

That's not asking too much is it?

 

[R.Mackey]

No one stays on the AE911truth as an eng or architect unless we see their diploma so if you see an "IP Nightly" listed its only temporary.

"IP Nightly?"

You guys are something else.

 

[PhantomWolf]

http://www.phillyblast.com/benthere.htm

This isn't relabile. Note that it was done with the help of the disinformationist Brent Blanchard.

 

[PhantomWolf]

But you don't need to be an architect or structural engineer to know that 9/11 was an inside job. All you have to do is READ THE FEMA REPORT !!!

So 2003... How about you get yourself up to date and read the NIST report, Hmmmm?

(1) Sulfidization of steel that could not be explained

Oh I am sure that Dr Frank Greening (Apollo 20) can help you with that one. Have you read his paper on the sulphidisation of steel by gypsum in a carbon monoxide rich atmosphere? No I thought not.

(2) The supports that would have to fail could not have

You mean the supports that were bowing inwards and shown to be doing so by the police helicopter images?

(3) They admit that their theories had only a very "low probability of occurance"

And you, still being stuck in 2003, haven't noticed that FEMA's short investigation got a few things wrong that NIST has since worked on? Thought not.[/QUOTE]

 

[beachnut]

No one stays on the AE911truth as an eng or architect unless we see their diploma so if you see an "IP Nightly" listed its only temporary.

You guys can stop using fake names because they don't get up there.

BTW There can be a $10,000.00 fine for representing yourself as an engineer.

Wrong there are some that are not, and some that are not even around. Amazing what you can do with a computer and stuff. I would say half are fake. What do you think? I can not believe there are any who believe the recycled junk that the site stands for.

10,000 dollars, really? Show me.

AE911truth is a bunch of people who can not think for themselves on 9/11. AEFT is a joke. Shows how dumb even so called professionals can be. Proof someone missed some critical classes on thinking and research.

10,000 dollars? You are one funny guy.

 

[beachnut]

Lets be clear about why I will not debate any of you debunkers:

You have no support, evidence or facts to support your ideas. Clear! I could tell that when I saw AE911truth lies and more lies. I know why you cannot debate, and you know it is lack of facts. You can not even list the facts to support any of you 9/11 ideas. Nice try.

You lie. You misrepresent your qualifications. You support the officials lies and ignore obvious fact, but most of all YOU LIE all the time. Peter Weaver you lied and said you were a degreed engineer. You lose right there.

Show me an official lie about 9/11. Please, so far not one has come up. What are the big official lies that make you fantasy true? If Peter Weaver said he was an engineer and is not, at least he is smarter than all the engineers you have at AE911truth place. All of you engineers seem to have problems with logical and rational thought, pertaining to 9/11.

I have spent many hours argueing 9/11 on sites like this. The science that gets introduced is always incorrect, sometimes laughable.

I agree you have zero facts and mess up physics. You have joined the idiots from the 9/11 truth movement, relax, you have zero capability to think for yourself or gather facts on 9/11. You have drank the KoolAid, just enjoy being with the poor researchers.

But you don't need to be an architect or structural engineer to know that 9/11 was an inside job. All you have to do is READ THE FEMA REPORT !!!

I do not have to read the FEMA report to figure out 9/11 and NO, you do not have to be an architect or an engineer to figure out 9/11, and it seems you guys are all messed up and lost out on something about 9/11. You guys are not too good. I would say a fifth grader could figure out 9/11, and you guys messed up everything 9/11.

Its right there in black and white:

(1) Sulfidization of steel that could not be explained

(2) The supports that would have to fail could not have

(3) They admit that their theories had only a very "low probability of occurance"

There is no sulfur in the WTC. Wow. You forgot tons of sulfur in the wallboard. Tons. Who said the supports could not fail? Oh you are talking about WTC7. No bombs here, I bet you are a OKC CTer too. Wrong once, wrong twice. Wrong all around.

Also, its been shown that wtc'97 was an inside job with leaked tapes. Its a matter of congressional testimony that the bombs described in the official version of the OKC bombing could not have done the damage. Mainstream reported bombs inside the building after the blasts. Lee Harvey Oswald did not shoot JFK.

So you be just one big CT guy with zero facts. Good to know you are just plan old CTEr from way back.

I have no interest in anything but honest debate and its impossible to debate 9/11 theories with dupporters of the official version. Even PM, Nova, BBC & NIST misrepresented the construction of the buildings wrt strength & size of central core.

You have no facts. So I know you are bogus. Zip, the big zero.

As far as the architect that said he would debate anyone, anytime on 9/11 conspiracy theories, I don't believe him. I've debated too many structural engineers and watched my fellow truthers with no scientific background make mincemeat out of their arguements using facts from the incident.

Proof, source. I doubt it.

Go head...debunk away.

You have no facts or evidence to debunk, do you?

 

[Doug Plumb]

"Wouldn't an EE realize the utter improbability of WIRING up the two WTC towers for a controlled demolition without detection?"

For all the schools I have attended and places I have worked at I do not recall anyone ever approaching maintainance workers and asking them exactly what they were doing and demanding verification of what they were doing or asking for identification.

This would be the easiest thing to do. Hiding is best done in plain sight.

 

[Doug Plumb]

As far as what happened on 9/11, we may never know. I know that there is a professional society for Directed Energy Weapons developers and I know that nukes have been developed exclusively for building demolitiuon because I have seen the US gov docs to this affect.

The evidence has been destroyed, it may be that no one will ever know exactly what did happen but that does not prevent us from knowing what did not happen and who has been lying about it and who has benefitted from all of the wars and the police state.

"MIC" stands for Military Industrial Complex. Many of you would do well to learn more about MIC and what it means for our economy.

 

[ref]

"Wouldn't an EE realize the utter improbability of WIRING up the two WTC towers for a controlled demolition without detection?"

For all the schools I have attended and places I have worked at I do not recall anyone ever approaching maintainance workers and asking them exactly what they were doing and demanding verification of what they were doing or asking for identification.

This would be the easiest thing to do. Hiding is best done in plain sight.

You support the mini-nuke theory? What evidence has lead you to this belief?

ETA: What kind of documents are you talking about, that you mentioned seeing?

 

[Brainache]

As far as what happened on 9/11, we may never know. I know that there is a professional society for Directed Energy Weapons developers and I know that nukes have been developed exclusively for building demolitiuon because I have seen the US gov docs to this affect.

The evidence has been destroyed, it may be that no one will ever know exactly what did happen but that does not prevent us from knowing what did not happen and who has been lying about it and who has benefitted from all of the wars and the police state.

"MIC" stands for Military Industrial Complex. Many of you would do well to learn more about MIC and what it means for our economy.

Dear Mr Plumb,
I believe you are about to discover that many people here at JREF know quite a lot about these subjects. I hope people can keep the ensuing discussion polite, because I believe if you take the time to read and comprehend the things that people will say here, you may find it to be a rewarding educational experience.

But in the meantime, did you say nukes?

Cheers
Brainache.

 

[pomeroo]

As far as what happened on 9/11, we may never know. I know that there is a professional society for Directed Energy Weapons developers and I know that nukes have been developed exclusively for building demolitiuon because I have seen the US gov docs to this affect.

The evidence has been destroyed, it may be that no one will ever know exactly what did happen but that does not prevent us from knowing what did not happen and who has been lying about it and who has benefitted from all of the wars and the police state.

"MIC" stands for Military Industrial Complex. Many of you would do well to learn more about MIC and what it means for our economy.

Wow, you're dumb!

 

[Doug Plumb]

"Show me an official lie about 9/11. Please, so far not one has come up."

Many of the supposed hijackers that crashed the planes into the towers have shown up alive. This has been reported by multiple mainstream sources. I'm not going to give you a link because if you were interested in truth you would know this.

Or, how about the towers collapsing from fire when its obvious from the video that towers 1 & 2 were blown up & wtc7 was a perfectly executed conventional controlled demolition (textbook example). You can see pieces being ejected outward and upward during towers 1 & 2 collapse. Fire doesn't do that.

How about the gov saying that no one ever considered someone flying planes into the wtc's when their own internal docs, publiucations and memos prove otherwise. Plus it WAS ON TV - The Lone Gunman.

So theres a few lies just off the top of my head.

The FBI tapes of the wtc '93 bombing prove FBI involvement in both planning and execution of that bombing - again on mainstream but before the big corporate conglomeration of the media that was necessary to bring the USA and the world under fascists dictatorship control.

Maybe we will meet up at one of the detention centers that have been built (also on mainstream).

Perhaps you will wake up when the cops start grabbing the cute kids off the street and using them for the international sex slave trade - corporate profits for Haliburton & Bechtel. (also on mainstream)

Maybe you should just stick your head back in the sand.

 

[ref]

Doug, too much Alex Jones is bad for your health. Seriously.

 

[Brainache]

"Show me an official lie about 9/11. Please, so far not one has come up."

Many of the supposed hijackers that crashed the planes into the towers have shown up alive. This has been reported by multiple mainstream sources. I'm not going to give you a link because if you were interested in truth you would know this.

Or, how about the towers collapsing from fire when its obvious from the video that towers 1 & 2 were blown up & wtc7 was a perfectly executed conventional controlled demolition (textbook example). You can see pieces being ejected outward and upward during towers 1 & 2 collapse. Fire doesn't do that.

How about the gov saying that no one ever considered someone flying planes into the wtc's when their own internal docs, publiucations and memos prove otherwise. Plus it WAS ON TV - The Lone Gunman.

So theres a few lies just off the top of my head.

The FBI tapes of the wtc '93 bombing prove FBI involvement in both planning and execution of that bombing - again on mainstream but before the big corporate conglomeration of the media that was necessary to bring the USA and the world under fascists dictatorship control.

Maybe we will meet up at one of the detention centers that have been built (also on mainstream).

Perhaps you will wake up when the cops start grabbing the cute kids off the street and using them for the international sex slave trade - corporate profits for Haliburton & Bechtel. (also on mainstream)

Maybe you should just stick your head back in the sand.

Well that went well. Sorry Doug you are not actually referring to reality are you?

I think we need a Plug for all the Dumb that keeps pouring into this forum.