The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job

tmd2_1 said:
No i think it is non-existent.
Click to expand...

No... you just say its all fake...

Apparently you dont know the difference.

Lets start with Bin Laden admitting it... oh wait no, that's "fake", right? See what I mean? Probably not.

You require both genius conspirators that are also most luckiest people alive while at the same exact being the most bumbling incompetent idiots you could ever imagine.

For example, you believe they destroyed WTC7 to get rid of documents. Because apparently the NWO keeps all their top secret documents in one building with no backups and they have to demolish the entire building in order to get rid of it. How about the fact that truthers claim that they carried out 911 to give them a reason to attack Iraq, except included no Iraqi's at all rather they had Saudi's they're allies with and in fact included no links at all to Iraq so much so that their own 911 Commission condemns them for trying to connect the two. ... Like I said, genius moron conspirators.
 
Last edited:
tmd2_1 said:
I love posts like this. You know the "lack of paper trail". You know because the paper trail linking OBL and AQ is airtight.
Click to expand...

A year old five thousand word analysis gets 25 words of derp.

You mean the several videoes in which AQ and OBL admit it, sport?

The 911 forum is dying (rest in peace) and nonsense like this is hastening its demise.
 
Last edited:
Edx said:
No... you just say its all fake...

Apparently you dont know the difference.

Lets start with Bin Laden admitting it... oh wait no, that's "fake", right? See what I mean? Probably not.

You require both genius conspirators that are also most luckiest people alive while at the same exact being the most bumbling incompetent idiots you could ever imagine.

For example, you believe they destroyed WTC7 to get rid of documents. Because apparently the NWO keeps all their top secret documents in one building with no backups and they have to demolish the entire building in order to get rid of it. How about the fact that truthers claim that they carried out 911 to give them a reason to attack Iraq, except included no Iraqi's at all rather they had Saudi's they're allies with and in fact included no links at all to Iraq so much so that their own 911 Commission condemns them for trying to connect the two. ... Like I said, genius moron conspirators.
Click to expand...

The videos are another subject. But yes I do not believe them to be authentic. I'm talking about a "paper-trail" An e-mail, hard drive, CD, floppy disk (they were used at the time) Something that involved the actual planning. Surely there should be something...I mean the plot was years in development.
 
tmd2_1 said:
The videos are another subject. But yes I do not believe them to be authentic. I'm talking about a "paper-trail" An e-mail, hard drive, CD, floppy disk (they were used at the time) Something that involved the actual planning. Surely there should be something...I mean the plot was years in development.
Click to expand...

Tmb if you cant even accept them saying they did it with their own mouths with their own voices, then its easy to dismiss everything else as fake. Good god, it comes as easily to you as breathing. Under what condition would you ever accept any piece of evidence as legitimate? :rolleyes: You already know there is never anything you would ever accept because its so easy for you to say its fake.

I like how you totally ignored the point about how moronic your conspiracy theory is.
 
Last edited:
Edx said:
Tmb if you cant even accept them saying they did it with their own mouths with their own voices, then its easy to dismiss everything else as fake. Good god, it comes as easily to you as breathing. Under what condition would you ever accept any piece of evidence as legitimate? :rolleyes: You already know there is never anything you would ever accept.

I like how you totally ignored the point about how moronic your conspiracy theory is.
Click to expand...



Forget about what would accept or not, the type of material i mentioned above was never even reported to have been found (to my knowledge). There's nothing for me to say that is "fake"
 
silver birch said:
American Airlines itself is the source for information that flights 11 and 77 did not fly on 9/11

http://letsrollforums.com/did-flights-11-and-t19082.html
Click to expand...

OMG; you twoofers has nothing more to do than to regurgtiate old stories that has been debunked to death??? How about using the "search" feature that you can find on the top of the page on the forum??

Hint:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146205

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4843665#post4843665

Puhlease; get a life, man! :rolleyes:
 
tempesta29 said:
And I assume you have evidence that this isn't possible.
Click to expand...

Your the person who started the claim, its like for example a creationist saying there is a god, but he wants people to disprove it. Its not up to the person who did not make the claim to prove you wrong, it is upon yourself to present evidence and make a case of why you believe it. Unless your presenting your evidence well, you will be just dancing with full of hot air until you present your evidence.
 
tmd2_1 said:
I love posts like this. You know the "lack of paper trail". You know because the paper trail linking OBL and AQ is airtight.
Click to expand...

I love posts like this where someone does not comprehend the orders of magnitude of difference between one man funding a small organisation in a primitive land and that involved in any of the twoofer versions of reality;).
 
silver birch said:
American Airlines itself is the source for information that flights 11 and 77 did not fly on 9/11

http://letsrollforums.com/did-flights-11-and-t19082.html
Click to expand...
The link doesn't seem to be working.

No matter. Jayhan's head never seems to be working either.

I am going to take a wild guess that you are referring to the on-time take-off and arrival data that is kept on every flight.

There is no such because the flight was never anywhere ner its destination when it it crashed.

Want to have a little fun with this? Find the entry for another aircraft that creashed on any given day from the same source.
 
Sabretooth said:
Comparison/Mass Fail

~1 lb Soda Cans do not equal 300,000 lb Aircraft.

The only thing you verified here is that you don't understand physics...among other things.
Click to expand...

unfortunately, plane fuel tanks in the thin aluminium skin wings are filled with jet fuel, not coke. if a real plane,(not a cartoon one), did fly into the towers, the fuel would explode on impact. this is why John Skilling, the chief engineer who built the towers made the walls from 2in thick box girder steel and claimed they would survive the impact and fire from a hit by a 707, which, although slightly smaller than a 757, had a higher cruise speed and therefore more kinetic energy.
why not fill the can with jet fuel and try the stunt again?
 
silver birch said:
unfortunately, plane fuel tanks in the thin aluminium skin wings are filled with jet fuel, not coke. if a real plane,(not a cartoon one), did fly into the towers, the fuel would explode on impact. this is why John Skilling, the chief engineer who built the towers made the walls from 2in thick box girder steel and claimed they would survive the impact and fire from a hit by a 707, which, although slightly smaller than a 757, had a higher cruise speed and therefore more kinetic energy.
why not fill the can with jet fuel and try the stunt again?
Click to expand...

It did.
 
silver birch said:
unfortunately, plane fuel tanks in the thin aluminium skin wings are filled with jet fuel, not coke. if a real plane,(not a cartoon one), did fly into the towers, the fuel would explode on impact. this is why John Skilling, the chief engineer who built the towers made the walls from 2in thick box girder steel and claimed they would survive the impact and fire from a hit by a 707, which, although slightly smaller than a 757, had a higher cruise speed and therefore more kinetic energy.
why not fill the can with jet fuel and try the stunt again?
Click to expand...

Can you source John Skilling claiming the towers would survive the fires that follow the impact? I doubt he ever said such a thing.

The towers for sure did survive the impacts. But not because they "made the walls from 2in thick box girder steel". It seems you believe that John Skilling's assessment that the towers would survive implies that the impacted columns would survive, or that their thickness was predicated by the impact scenario? Well, they weren't designed and built with plane impacts in mind. Their thickness was predicated by the vertical (gravity) and wind loads they had to expect. Skilling much later, long after design was finished, determined that a 707 cutting out the perimeter columns it meets would not make the building collapse, as other columns not hit by the plane would take and survive the redistributed loads.

So please, can you source John Skilling claiming the towers would survive the fires that follow the impact?
 
silver birch said:
unfortunately, plane fuel tanks in the thin aluminium skin wings are filled with jet fuel, not coke. if a real plane,(not a cartoon one), did fly into the towers, the fuel would explode on impact. this is why John Skilling, the chief engineer who built the towers made the walls from 2in thick box girder steel and claimed they would survive the impact and fire from a hit by a 707, which, although slightly smaller than a 757, had a higher cruise speed and therefore more kinetic energy.
why not fill the can with jet fuel and try the stunt again?
Click to expand...

The columns at impact point were 1/4" thick not 2"

Wings sliced through the steel. The engineers, they work in the knowledge industry. They know how it happened because they can quantify how nature works, unlike those that claim planes should have bounced off the buildings.

"International Journal of Impact Engineering
Click to expand...
Volume 28, Issue 6, July 2003, Pages 601-625


How the airplane wing cut through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center

T. Wierzbicki, and X. Teng
Department of Ocean Engineering, Impact & Crashworthiness Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Room 5-218 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139-4307, USA


Received 20 April 2002.
Available online 11 December 2002.

Abstract

The problem of the airplane wing cutting through the exterior columns of the World Trade Center is treated analytically. The exterior columns are thin-walled box beam made of high strength steel. The complex structure of the airplane is lumped into another box, but it has been found that the equivalent thickness of the box is an order of magnitude larger than the column thickness. The problem can be then modeled as an impact of a rigid mass traveling with the velocity of 240 m/s into a hollow box-like vertical member. The deformation and failure process is very local and is broken into three phases: shearing of the impacting flange; tearing of side webs; and tensile fracture of the rear flange. Using the exact dynamic solution in the membrane deformation mode, the critical impact velocity to fracture the impacted flange was calculated to be 155 m/s for both flat and round impacting mass. Therefore, the wing would easily cut through the outer column. It was also found that the energy absorbed by plastic deformation and fracture of the ill-fated column is only 6.7% of the initial kinetic energy of the wing."
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...2001069#sec2.1
Click to expand...

You're 10 years late and all the engineering short.
Another failure of belief by faith. Belief by knowledge superior, conforms with nature.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom