Star Wars Beam Weapon and the WTC Bathtub

[gumboot]

I'm still waiting for cars with - on the hood - the warning "Caution, do not step in front while car is moving forward!"

I kinda imagine it like the safety markings on aircraft...

NO STEP

-Gumboot

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

There is nothing to debunk when you start with the dolts who propose a beam weapon! You are nuts, Wood is nuts, Reynolds is nuts. You have to be nuts to present evidence with no facts, zero calculations of merit.

So when you show your work we can start to help you with a beam weapon. But you must be nuts since there have been many posts that provided evidence why a beam weapon would not work. Did you miss it?

Only complete idiots would say a beam weapon did 9/11 and not explain how. The only question now is the number of people who believe it, and do we need to add your name to the list of idiots?

This has to be one of the top ten dumb ideas for why 9/11 happened.

I read the problems with deploying beam weapons. Points well taken. Same with rigging skyscrapers with explosives.

Whatever happened, there must be scientific explanations. I'm still waiting for anyone to offer plausible explanations for the data sets in Wood/Reynolds. Ad hominems against them or me are not productive.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Whatever happened, there must be scientific explanations. I'm still waiting for anyone to offer plausible explanations for the data sets in Wood/Reynolds. Ad hominems against them or me are not productive.

youve been offered explanations, you simly dont like them because they dont involve massive coverups and secret cabals

 

[Alt+F4]

Yes. No rubble, yet toasted cars. Cars half toasted, half pristine. Spontaneoulsy exploding car engines (not gas tanks). Firetruck burned out and windows broken but otherwise undamaged.

Yes, very hard for me to understand, do take a try a explaining how a flaming building falls and accomplishes this stuff.

So you're saying only the star wars beam can burn only half a car? I guess you missed this photograph when I first posted it:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2070882#post2070882

Read page two of The New York Times from September 12, 2001. Firefighters clearly state that the cars exploded due to exploding GAS TANKS.

 

[negativ]

I'm still waiting for anyone to offer plausible explanations for the data sets in Wood/Reynolds.

Here go you. Case closed.

 

[Alt+F4]

From Wood/Reynolds
3. The rail lines, rail cars and tunnels had only light damage.

That's an outright lie. This photo is of the Cordlandt Street subway system (N/R line) shortly after 9/11.

 

[Gravy]

I read the problems with deploying beam weapons. Points well taken. Same with rigging skyscrapers with explosives.

Whatever happened, there must be scientific explanations. I'm still waiting for anyone to offer plausible explanations for the data sets in Wood/Reynolds. Ad hominems against them or me are not productive.

Your pretending that all this hasn't been patiently explained to you does not advance your argument. Your pretending that the official reports don't exist does not advance your argument.

Stop pretending that these things don't exist. Take the first train out of Christopheraville, Ace. This is BAD.

​

 

[maccy]

I read the problems with deploying beam weapons. Points well taken. Same with rigging skyscrapers with explosives.

Whatever happened, there must be scientific explanations. I'm still waiting for anyone to offer plausible explanations for the data sets in Wood/Reynolds. Ad hominems against them or me are not productive.

As others have said, falling burning debris from collapsing buildinga - read back through this thread for details.

Also, none of the photographs in the woods/reynolds report have any guarantee of authenticity as to when or where they are taken which rather muddles the data sets before we even start.

But my main reason for posting, Truthseeker, is that I love the fact that you're trying to prove that Gravy is bad person by sporting a signature that accuses him of killing a kitten every time you tell a lie.

 

[Gravy]

But my main reason for posting, Truthseeker, is that I love the fact that you're trying to prove that Gravy is bad person by sporting a signature that accuses him of killing a kitten every time you tell a lie.

Thank you. TruthSeeker1234, I don't kill any kittens when you lie. I forward your posts to a service in India.

​

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Thank you. TS, I don't kill any kittens when you lie. I forward your posts to a service in India.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/87904558d6428eff8.jpg​

hmm, ive been forwarding them to seal clubbers in canada, does that count as double jeopardy?

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

Your pretending that all this hasn't been patiently explained to you does not advance your argument. Your pretending that the official reports don't exist does not advance your argument.

Stop pretending that these things don't exist. Take the first train out of Christopheraville, Ace. This is BAD.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/87904558d6428eff8.jpg
​

NIST did not study the "collapses", only the events leading up to them. You know that Gravy, stop pretending otherwise.

No, there are many observations for which I have not heard a scientific explanation. Posting pictures of kittens does nothing to further science.

What about the round holes? The unburned paper next to the exploding cars? THe exploding firetrucks? THe melting car parts, what is the explanation for this? WTC3, where did it go? What about the south part of WTC4? Please describe the mechanism by which WTC6 ended up so hollowed out. What about the "shooters", what causes this phenomenon?

And where is all the missing mass? Where are the floor assemblies? Where is the core of WTC2? It was standing after the colllapse, 700 feet of it, then, it disappeared. Where did it go?

Are there records of the steel that supposedly went on barges to China? Not that those couldn't be fudged, but, do they even exist?

Is "drywall dust" really your best explanation for the dense white and brown dust which is churning out of steel members continually as pieces fall? I certainly don't buy that one. This looks as though the ends of the steel columns are belching smoke. What would explain this?

 

[Horatius]

I read the problems with deploying beam weapons. Points well taken. Same with rigging skyscrapers with explosives.

Whatever happened, there must be scientific explanations. I'm still waiting for anyone to offer plausible explanations for the data sets in Wood/Reynolds. Ad hominems against them or me are not productive.

Nice to see you acknowledge the problems with Space Beams and Uhmplosives.

Now, could you address the comments I made earlier?

Seriously, there have been explanations for almost all of these. Why don't you post even one "scientific" explanation for why you don't accept them? Start with the "round holes", it should be pretty easy. Once you've actually addressed the (unpaid!*) work I've done for you, we can move on.

What is there in my analysis of the "round holes" that doesn't meet your scientific requirements? Did I miss something? Do you not agree that there is consdierable overlap between the placement and size of holes, and the placement of the roof beams?

 

[Bell]

NIST did not study the "collapses", only the events leading up to them. You know that Gravy, stop pretending otherwise.

No, there are many observations for which I have not heard a scientific explanation. Posting pictures of kittens does nothing to further science.

What about the round holes? The unburned paper next to the exploding cars? THe exploding firetrucks? THe melting car parts, what is the explanation for this? WTC3, where did it go? What about the south part of WTC4? Please describe the mechanism by which WTC6 ended up so hollowed out. What about the "shooters", what causes this phenomenon?

And where is all the missing mass? Where are the floor assemblies? Where is the core of WTC2? It was standing after the colllapse, 700 feet of it, then, it disappeared. Where did it go?

Are there records of the steel that supposedly went on barges to China? Not that those couldn't be fudged, but, do they even exist?

Is "drywall dust" really your best explanation for the dense white and brown dust which is churning out of steel members continually as pieces fall? I certainly don't buy that one. This looks as though the ends of the steel columns are belching smoke. What would explain this?
[qimg]http://s18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/ARG/Image335.jpg[/qimg]

Dude, lay off the dope!

 

[Kent1]

NIST did not study the "collapses", only the events leading up to them. You know that Gravy, stop pretending otherwise.

Why are you so dishonest?
Or do you simply not read our replys just like you didn't read the NIST reports?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2099388&postcount=289

We are serious when we say maybe you should think about some professional help.

 

[stateofgrace]

I read the problems with deploying beam weapons. Points well taken. Same with rigging skyscrapers with explosives.

Whatever happened, there must be scientific explanations. I'm still waiting for anyone to offer plausible explanations for the data sets in Wood/Reynolds. Ad hominems against them or me are not productive.

BS, you have spouted on and on about space beams, evaporating steal, mysterious exploding concrete, rocket propelled debris, mysteriously burning cars and even vaporised people.

Everything has been explained to you, several times, so lets have lets have your version of events.

So BS what happened to the Towers? Please summarise.

Include in this summary, the following.

The planes
The fires
The space beam(s)
Vaporised steal
Exploding concrete
90% of the Towers mass ( which is approx 450,000 tons)
Rocket propelled debris
Burning cars
Vaporised people.
Round holes in buildings.
Missing mass
the missing 700 foot core
steel columns that belch smoke.

Any finally include the Chinese in your master theory.

If you like you can include your non damaged bath tub and how this all fits into your theory.

So BS lets have, let’s have the BS version of the collapse of the Towers

 

[Gravy]

Still pretending that every single point hasn't been explained to you? Didn't I just remind you about that, oh, two posts ago?

Still posting photos that include victims falling from buildings, TS? You're a class act.

Goodbye, and please seek professional help for your problems.

 

[Horatius]

What about the round holes?

Yes, what about the round holes?

Do you really expect other people to waste time on your questions when you won't even address my relatively simple explanation of the round holes?

 

[Alt+F4]

Now, could you address the comments I made earlier?

He won't. TS's MO is to ask questions. Posters answer his questions. He ignores answers that go against his star wars beam theory so he just reposts the same questions again.

 

[Minadin]

My favorite all-time warning label of all time was on a bag of charcoal. It said:

WARNING: DO NOT BURN INSIDE
Charcoal smoke contains carbon monoxide, a substance which has been found by the state of California to cause cancer.

Not that you would possibly burn down your residence and even die by lighting a fire indoors. Not that you might die fairly quickly of asphixiation / smoke inhalation as the indoor fire used up oxygen in your house and produced toxic smoke. Not even that the carbon monoxide in that smoke could give you carbon monoxide poisoning, which causes people to pass out and die in a matter of hours. No, if you do it often enough, over a long enough period of time, there is a chance that you might someday develop cancer. Maybe. According to California.

Heck, by the time you develop that cancer it may be cureable.

 

[Bell]

Still pretending that every single point hasn't been explained to you? Didn't I just remind you about that, oh, two posts ago?

Still posting photos that include victims falling from buildings, TS? You're a class act.

Goodbye, and please seek professional help for your problems.

Is that really a person there in that picture?