COMMENTS:
Voted : There was no conspiracy therefore there was no evidence.
Conspiracy theorists are victims of trama and shock. This has been a proven scientific fact. Some people simply cannot deal with the reality of horrific events, so their minds create alternative answers for events via denial, to give them the mental relief they need to escape from their worst fears, the truth. The more they believe in their version of events the better they feel. Its all about denial.
This type of mental denial in the human mind in relation to horrific events has been seen many times before. The holocaust, the titanic, Kennedy's assassination etc. Doctors also see this with families, with the loss of loved ones in tragic accidents. It is a common mental disorder that can affect people of all ages and even people of intelligence.
That's why people created God and religious doctrines. So they can have an answer for their worst fear and reality, death.
{Conspiracy theorists are victims of trama and shock..
by Jinn_the_Kafir on Tue Oct 03, 06 12:31am}
Do you have EVIDENCE of this OPINION, or is just something you made up as yet another excuse for INSULTS?
Voted : Evidence is irrelevant.
{Conspiracy theorists are victims of trama and shock...
by Jinn_the_Kafir on Tue Oct 03, 06 12:31am}
Do you have SOLID EVIDENCE for this OPINION, or is just something that you made up as yet another attempt at PERSONAL ATTACKS? Because that's what it looks like to me.
While I may agree that there is some level of denial involved among those who accept the OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY, I think it's not at all scientific or valid for you to make sweeping statements without SOLID EVIDENCE.
As to other conspiraces, of which there have been many; JFK's assassination with the obviously impossible "magic bullet" being one, but also the IranContra Conspiracy, the Watergate Conspiracy, the "Lies about WMDs in Iraq" Conspiracy, just to name a few...obviously CONSPIRACIES DO EXIST , and to pretend otherwise is a sign of severe mental trauma and denial, but that's only MY OPINION.
So, Jinn, do you have any SOLID EVIDENCE about the Official Conspiracy Theorists are only victims of shock and trauma... I agree with you, but, you haven't shown any scientific evidence to prove your claim (Conspiracy theorists are victims of trama and shock) - I would like to see cited sources, quotes, and links.
I do notice, by the way, that for the OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORISTS, it does appear that all evidence to the contrary of their ideas is considered irrelevant by them.
It doesn't apparently matter to them that there were that there were hundeds of witnesses to explosions at the WTC buildings, and that the witnesses claims are supported by video evidence showing lines of explosions blowing out the floors before the falling debris could reach those floors, and the seismic data showing impossibly short tremors revealing the use of explosives in those controlled demolitions.
It doesn't apparently matter to them that NOBODY has ever successfully simulated the collapses of WTC 1, 2, & 7 without considering controlled demolition, and that means NOBODY. Not NIST, not, NOVA, Dr Eagar, FEMA, MIT, Bazant & Zhou, nor Dr Frank Green, nor anyone else. NOBODY has succeeded; those who have claimed to have done so, have ALWAYS been proven to be LIARS when their mathematical formula were checked.
It doesn't apparently matter to them that until the OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORISTS can cite a link, source, and quote from SOMEBODY, ANYBODY, whose mathematical simulation or computer simulation based on the EMPIRICAL DATA (without distortion, deviation, or fictious claims) PROVES that there was enough energy for a gravity-driven collapse, that they have NOTHING to support their claims.
It doesn't apparently matter to them that it's impossible to make cellphone calls from passenger planes flying at cruising altitude six miles up and flying at over 450mph without an onboard cellular basestation (technology which wasn't available prior to 2004 and is still in testing stage), and it's a FACT that cellphone calls from a vehicle moving at over 450mph (even if successfully make the handshake when flying at low altitude) will only last a few seconds since there is no time for the hand-off; the call will ALWAYS drop out in just a few seconds - minutes long cellphone calls are IMPOSSIBLE. The the OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORISTS can cite never a link, source, and quote from any scientific study to prove that those cellphone calls were possible.
and I've asked these questions many times, but all they do is make silly excuses and dance around trying to avoid answering them;
EVERY OTHER OCCASSION both before and since Sept 11 2001, when STEEL-FRAMED tower buildings collapsed down at near free fall speed into their footprint, it has been due to a controlled demolition.
Can any of you cite a single exception to this?
With a photo, video, or anything else.
and I'll repeat this nice and big since you seem to have problems reading it NO MENTION OF THE WORD "FIRE", YOU'RE IMAGINING IT!
Now please hurry and respond with some FACTS to back your bullshit!
This one about WTC 1;
WTC1
AA Flt 11
8:46:40 UTC - FAA last primary radar contact
8:46:30 UTC - seismic event/NIST
Both times are real and accurate
QUESTION- What caused the 8:46:30 seismic event?
(It can not be the aircrash since that happened at 8:46:40)
Don't start in here with any long-winded arguments; logically, because your beloved NIST embraced the 2005 revision of the seismic time by Dr. Kim (which infers UTC), the only way you win is you MUST discredit the 8:46:40 last primary radar contact that occurred (and no radar "sweep/refresh problem" exists as the contact was recorded (it's the last little triangle in the graph in the flight path study; it's all in the paper)).
Ginny Carr audiotape has a ~9.2 second gap between initial explosion and aircrash.
The 9/11 Commission avoided the time of the initial seismic event.
The 9/11 Commission avoided the many witnesses who testified of explosions in the basements.
NIST avoided the 9/11 Commission’s time.
NIST avoided the many witnesses who testified of explosions in the basements.
ANSWER- The only possibility: EXPLOSION(S)
I do hope that they will answer these questions one day, or at least admit that they can't. I believe it's a vain hope that they will display the honesty to admit that they have no answers and no solid evidence for their claims.
"no solid evidence for their claims"
Except for the DNA idedntified victims, plane wreckage, forensic evidence from the scenes and all of this evidence is backed up by virtually ALL of the scientific community worldwide.
To suggest that there is no evidence is a huge lie and a degrades the memories of the victims whose bodies were found and identified. Sickening.
Voted : There was no conspiracy therefore there was no evidence.
Simple.
OFFICIAL 9-11 CONSPIRACY: WHY IS THERE NO SOLID PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FOR AN ARAB CONSPIRACY?
serious ballot by wideheadofknowledge
Solid physical evidence being things like:
DNA evidence
Pieces of aircraft or missles or bombs (No pieces of aircraft - but pieces of missile were found at the Pentagon, probably carried off in that tarp, '...and the missile that hit this building...' - Donald Rumsfeld.
There are traces of controlled demolition though (Steven E Jones)
Documentation pertaining to the Arab/PNAC conspiracy (PNAC's own documentation - New Pearl Harbor etc...)
Why is there no evidence to back up the OFFICIAL Conspiracy Theorists claims?
~ Just tweaked that for you a little bit there WideHead' - you left out a couple of words and home truths - you're getting there though! (:
{Voted : There was no conspiracy therefore there was no evidence.
Simple.
by wolf_nipple_chips on Tue Oct 03, 06 2:22am}
Exactly, Mr Wolf there was no evidence that Arabs Did It. Nobody can even prove there were Arabs on those planes, especially as NINE OF THE HIJACKERS ARE STILL ALIVE - as most people should know by now (and I can hardly believe that you don't) they were vicitms of IDENTITY THEFT
Tracking the 19 Hijackers. What are they up to now? At least 9 of them survived 9/11
welfarestate . com / 911 /
Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
news . bbc . co . uk / 1 / hi / world / middle _ east / 1559151 . stm
'Suicide hijacker' is an airline pilot alive and well in Jeddah
news . independent . co . uk / world / middle _ east / story . jsp ? story = 94438
FBI probes hijackers' identities
news . bbc . co . uk / 1 / hi / world / americas / 1553754 . stm
QUOTE= "The FBI has said that the identities of some of its list of 19 hijackers behind last week's devastating attacks are in doubt.
It believes that some of the hijackers used false identities, possibly even names of people who are still alive,"
{ Except for the DNA idedntified victims,
by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 2:08am}
You even spell "identified" properly.
So who did the DNA sampling from the mythical Arabs? Did they send somebody to ask their relatives for DNA samples? I never saw any news about that. Please show us a link.
Also, I'd like to see some SOLID EVIDENCE from a CREDIBLE, INDEPENDENT, and VERIFIABLE source. Can you cite some? Please hurry and do so.
{virtually ALL of the scientific community...
by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 2:08am}
This like in VIRTUAL REALITY, neh?
By the way, can you support your sweeping and TOTALLY UNPROVEN claim with some legitimate polls and surveys? No, you can't, because you know that YOU are just spouting out rubbish and storytelling.
{Sickening.
by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 2:08am }
Playing EMOTIONAL GAMES because you have NO EVIDENCE again.
What's truly sickening is your participation in a criminal coverup.
"NINE OF THE HIJACKERS ARE STILL ALIVE"
No they are not. they all died. All your sources are 5 years old. Mistaken identity cases have been cleared up.
"So who did the DNA sampling from the mythical Arabs?"
I said victims - not perpetrators.
And your attack on my spelling is truly pathetic.
There is not a single shred of solid physical evidence for your claims.
And I ask - what happened to the passengers on the planes whose bodies were identified? Murdered elsewhere and shipped to the crash sites?
{No they are not.
by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 3:42am}
Prove it.
I want you cite quotes, links, sources from the hijackers families saying that really these men are dead. Can you do that? You should be able to find their obituaries published by their families right? Funny that you can never do that.
(NINE OF THE HIJACKERS ARE STILL ALIVE - as most people should know by now (and I can hardly believe that you don't) they were vicitms of IDENTITY THEFT
Tracking the 19 Hijackers. What are they up to now? At least 9 of them survived 9/11
welfarestate . com / 911 /
Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
news . bbc . co . uk / 1 / hi / world / middle _ east / 1559151 . stm
'Suicide hijacker' is an airline pilot alive and well in Jeddah
news . independent . co . uk / world / middle _ east / story . jsp ? story = 94438
FBI probes hijackers' identities
news . bbc . co . uk / 1 / hi / world / americas / 1553754 . stm
QUOTE= "The FBI has said that the identities of some of its list of 19 hijackers behind last week's devastating attacks are in doubt.
It believes that some of the hijackers used false identities, possibly even names of people who are still alive," )
{I - not perpetrators
by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 3:42am}
Well, it's obvious you can't prove with any SOLID EVIDENCE that there were Arabs on those planes then.
As I said before, I'd like to see some SOLID EVIDENCE from a CREDIBLE, INDEPENDENT, and VERIFIABLE source about the other bodies definitely not being only workers at the Pentagon. Can you cite some? Please hurry and do so
{here is not a single shred of solid physical evidence...
by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 3:42am}
I've noticed that YOU can't cite any for your claims.
{what happened to the passengers on the planes ..
by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 3:42am}
Do you have photos of them boarding the planes? I'd like to see some SOLID EVIDENCE from a CREDIBLE, INDEPENDENT, and VERIFIABLE source about the other bodies definitely not being only workers at the Pentagon. Can you cite some? Please hurry and do so. I'm waiting.
Voted : The evidence has been covered up.
And quick.
Lovelynice, I have added some more links on my user page.
Too laborious to put them in the comments window here.
Voted : There was no conspiracy therefore there was no evidence.
It is rather funny how lovelynice quotes sources that are 5 years old and that were cases of mistaken identity. Not much different from saying John Smith from Bangor, Maine was on the plane and then finding another John Smith living in Bangor. That is essentially the case with these mistaken identities.
It is interesting to see that lovelynice admits that "EVIDENCE IS IRRELEVANT".
Actually, they did do DNA testing on the remains of the Pentagon Flight 77 thing. That is how they verified who was on the flight and who in the building was killed. They obtained samples from family members and matched them up. Those that didn't match with anyone known to be on the plane were DNA with Arabic genetic sequences. Odd how that works out. I could provide the sources for this, but it wouldn't matter one bit to you. If it doesn't fit your prior belief you ignore it and spam something else.
BTW, lovelynice, because someone said they heard "explosions" doesn't necessarily mean that they were in reality "explosions" that were detonated to bring the building down. There are a number of alternative explanations. First, explosions could be just computer equipment exploding due to the fire. Second, if a floor collapses, it is going to sound a lot like an explosion. As always, you forget completely just how these tons of explosions were secretly brought into the buildings and secretly hidden. They also were somehow coordinated with an airplane hitting the building. WOW. How did they coordinate all of this so efficiently and secretly? It is amazing and stunning how they somehow pulled that off, but were utter dunces in regards to Iraq.
Every controlled demolition that I have seen starts with the bottom collapsing first. That is to be sure the whole building goes down. The World Trade Centers did not start with floor 1 being blown out first.
{ It is interesting to see that lovelynice admits that "EVIDENCE IS IRRELEVANT" by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Trying to take my words out of context won't get you anywhere, Mr Fiddle.
I will simply repeat them again IN THEIR CONTEXT;
{Conspiracy theorists are victims of trama and shock...
by Jinn_the_Kafir on Tue Oct 03, 06 12:31am}
Do you have SOLID EVIDENCE for this OPINION, or is just something that you made up as yet another attempt at PERSONAL ATTACKS? Because that's what it looks like to me.
While I may agree that there is some level of denial involved among those who accept the OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY, I think it's not at all scientific or valid for you to make sweeping statements without SOLID EVIDENCE.
As to other conspiraces, of which there have been many; JFK's assassination with the obviously impossible "magic bullet" being one, but also the IranContra Conspiracy, the Watergate Conspiracy, the "Lies about WMDs in Iraq" Conspiracy, just to name a few...obviously CONSPIRACIES DO EXIST , and to pretend otherwise is a sign of severe mental trauma and denial, but that's only MY OPINION.
So, Jinn, do you have any SOLID EVIDENCE about the Official Conspiracy Theorists are only victims of shock and trauma... I agree with you, but, you haven't shown any scientific evidence to prove your claim (Conspiracy theorists are victims of trama and shock) - I would like to see cited sources, quotes, and links.
{ Actually, they did do DNA testing on the remains of the Pentagon Flight 77 thing. by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Did you miss something IMPORTANT? Why yes you did! I'd like to see some SOLID EVIDENCE from a CREDIBLE, INDEPENDENT, and VERIFIABLE source about the other bodies definitely not being only workers at the Pentagon. Can you cite some? Please hurry and do so. I'm waiting.
{ were DNA with Arabic genetic sequences
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Please cite scientific evidence, sources, quotes, and links PROVING that there was DNA analysis which showed a number of people had "Arabic genetic sequences", including what those "Arabic genetic sequences" are that would ONLY apply to Arabs. I know of NO SUCH THING.
Sounds to me like you're making stuff up again.
{Every controlled demolition that I have seen ...
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Good for you. I've seen lots too. Enough to recognise a controlled demolition when I see it.
WTC 7 for example has to be one of the most perfect IMPLOSIVE CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS that I've ever seen. It collapses exactly how you describe those controlled demolitions. Of course, we already know there were bombs in the building
(Video of firemen reporting bombs in WTC 7
"Bomb in the building. Start clearing out"
"What did you say? Secondary device?"
"Bomb in the building, start clearing out"
youtube . com /watch ? v = W53 wdu 8IGlE&NR)
Looks a lot like the Landmark Building demolition and most other controlled demolitions.
WTC 1 & 2 looked like EXPLOSIVE CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS which are charaterised by the distinct appearance of being BLOWN TO BITS, floor by floor.
This is particularly clear as stated by the hundreds of witnesses describing the BIG BOOMS, EXPLOSIONS, and the videos showing in slow motion long lines of EXPLOSIONS blowing out whole floors, floor by floor, before the falling debris from above could reach those floors. Then there's the seismic data showing tremors that are MUCH SHORTER than the collapse times, and therefore couldn't have been caused by collapses but by another energy source.
Perhaps Mr Fiddle you can answer this question about WTC 1;
WTC1
AA Flt 11
8:46:40 UTC - FAA last primary radar contact
8:46:30 UTC - seismic event/NIST
Both times are real and accurate
QUESTION- What caused the 8:46:30 seismic event?
(It can not be the aircrash since that happened at 8:46:40)
{They also were somehow coordinated with an airplane hitting the building...
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Yes, amazingly EASY. All it requires is for someone looking UP AT THE BUILDINGS, and pressing a button.
SO EASY!
{these tons of explosions were secretly brought into the buildings and secretly hidden..
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
No, Mr Fiddle, only YOU pretend that I forget anything. It should be obvious by now that I NEVER DO.
And, you also KNOW DAMN WELL, that I mentioned many, many, many times how easy it would be to do.
I think it would be rather simple over a long period of time to secretly place explosives in those buldings. You get some John Smiths dressed up like "electricians" or "A/C repairman" with the proper tools, training, timing and access and i'm sure they can hide that stuff. When was the last time you hovered over a repairman in a big office complex asking what the hell was he doing?
There was plenty of time and ways to get the explosives in there. To say otherwise is stupid. They could've put them in over a period of MONTHS before that day. They could've brought them in on nights only when hardly anyone was there. They could've used areas of the building that were off limits for repairs to the regular sheeple workers.
There was plenty of time.
Ben Fountain, a financial analyst who worked in the World Trade Center, told People Magazine that in the weeks before 9-11, there were a number of unannounced and unusual drills where sections of both the Twin Towers and building 7 were evacuated for 'security reasons'.
Daria Coard, a guard in the North Tower, told Newsday that security detail was working 12 hour shifts for two weeks before 9-11, but on Thursday the 6th, bomb sniffing dogs were abruptly removed from the building.
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower.
WHY DO YOU BOTHER TRYING TO PRETEND THAT I HAVE NOT ALREADY ANSWERED THESE DUMB EXCUSES OF YOURS?
{There are a number of alternative explanations....
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13a}
Yes of course, there are. We can pretend that Magical Arabs made the laws of physics take a holiday for example. That would perfectly cover all your silliness as you ignore that the fact that actual collapses of WTC 1, 2, & 7 have NEVER been simulated successfully as gravity-driven collapses because all the math and physics says that those collapses are IMPOSSIBLE unless you accept controlled demolitions.
Until you idiots can cite a link, source, and quote from SOMEBODY, ANYBODY, whose mathematical simulation or computer simulation based on the EMPIRICAL DATA (without distortion, deviation, or bullshit fictions) PROVES that there was enough energy for a gravity-driven collapse, YOU HAVE NOTHING!
I tend to believe what the witnesses and firemen say. Firemen with years of experience described explosions, said that they were explosions, and described the collapses as controlled demolitions. We only have to look for ourselves at the videos of the destruction of those buildings in slow motion to see those explosions. Very loud, very noisy explosions that went BOOM BOOM BOOM.
{How did they coordinate all of this so efficiently and secretly...
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Must be pretty easy for any military or paramilitary organisation.
{quotes sources that are 5 years old by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Have a problem with the evidence? Then cite quotes, links, sources from the hijackers families saying that really these men are dead. Can you do that? You should be able to find their obituaries published by their families right? Funny that you can never do that.
(NINE OF THE HIJACKERS ARE STILL ALIVE - as most people should know by now (and I can hardly believe that you don't) they were vicitms of IDENTITY THEFT
Tracking the 19 Hijackers. What are they up to now? At least 9 of them survived 9/11
welfarestate . com / 911 /
Hijack 'suspects' alive and well
news . bbc . co . uk / 1 / hi / world / middle _ east / 1559151 . stm
'Suicide hijacker' is an airline pilot alive and well in Jeddah
news . independent . co . uk / world / middle _ east / story . jsp ? story = 94438
FBI probes hijackers' identities
news . bbc . co . uk / 1 / hi / world / americas / 1553754 . stm
QUOTE= "The FBI has said that the identities of some of its list of 19 hijackers behind last week's devastating attacks are in doubt.
It believes that some of the hijackers used false identities, possibly even names of people who are still alive," )
{quotes sources that are 5 years old by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Oh by the way, Mr Fiddle, by your logic, perhaps 9/11 didn't happen at all because the news for that is FIVE YEARS OLD TOO.
{because someone said they heard "explosions" doesn't necessarily mean that they were in reality "explosions"
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
It's fortunate then that there's SO MUCH corroborating evidence; particularly as ithe witnesses are supported by video evidence showing lines of explosions blowing out the floors before the falling debris could reach those floors, and there's seismic data showing impossibly short tremors revealing the use of explosives in those controlled demolitions.
{They obtained samples from family members and matched them up. by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Is there any INDEPENDENT evidence? By the way, where's your links, quotes, sources? Or does it all come from the same Bush Administration which lied about WMDs in Iraq, lied about the CIA secret prisons, and continues to lie about torturing people?
{I have added some more links on my user page. Too laborious to put them in the comments window here.
by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 6:54am}
I would. It's more honest.
^Well, what do you think of widehead's links?
by aya on Tue Oct 03, 06 10:01am
[+]
"Do you have SOLID EVIDENCE for this OPINION"
by Lovelynice.
Yes, the Tinfoil Hat people, the suckers who are making Alex Jones wealthy.
"All it requires is for someone looking UP AT THE BUILDINGS, and pressing a button"
Well, no. It requires months of rigging explosive charges throughout the builing. Something that never happened.
Lovelynice, we're still waiting for an example of physical evidence!
Throwing multiple posts of the same things we have addressed time and time again is a hollow tactic.
And suggesting that I am being less that honest by putting a link on my PUBLIC user page is bewildering in the extreme. I did it to make things easier for me and for anyone who simply wants to copy and paste the full link into their address bar.
You usual good naturedness seems strained of late - I wonder why?
{"All it requires is for someone looking UP AT THE BUILDINGS, and pressing a button"
Well, no. by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 5:08pm}
Why yes it does.
You know perfectly well that I was referring this stupid excuse of Mr Fiddle's;
{They also were somehow coordinated with an airplane hitting the building...
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Tue Oct 03, 06 7:13am}
Yes, amazingly EASY. All it requires is for someone looking UP AT THE BUILDINGS, and pressing a button.
SO EASY!
{ It requires months of rigging explosive charges throughout the builing. by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 5:08pm}
1) Cite a credible expert on demolitions at the very least for the claim of it taking "months", I believe a few weeks, no more than that would be required.
2) I don't see where they'd have any real problems for guys in overalls, that nobody really pays much attention to, doing their "maintenance", installing extra cables for "telecommunications", switching off the power at critical times (there were powerdowns that shut down parts of the WTC buildings), while not having to worry too much about bomb sniffer dogs (one day the dogs were taken away), looks like plenty of opportunity for secret agents with big budgets to plant explosives,
{Throwing multiple posts of the same things we have addressed time and time by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 5:13pm}
Addressed but never refuted or got around, which is why I remind you of them.
{And suggesting that I am being less that honest by putting a link on my PUBLIC user page by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 5:13pm}
It is less than honest. If you were being really honest with those links, you'd place the claims made by them in a ballot for debate. You're attempting to avoid debate on the claims by simply saying "Here they are, these are the equal to the Words of God and absolute truth"
{I did it to make things easier for me and for anyone who simply wants to copy and paste the full link into their address bar. by wideheadofknowledge on Tue Oct 03, 06 5:13pm}
I agree with that part, but I still see it as lazy and less than honest when you don't also put the same claims into ballots for debate. I could do the same thing,, and post so many links to back what I say that it would take pages and pages to print.
Less than honest?!
You don't deserve my time after that nonsensical insult.
In a ballot about evidence I make a direct link to my public page to make access easier for everyone and now I am being deceitful?!
You asked for a source - I gave one. I am not claiming it as the word of God or any such nonsense. It's just one example of a source that you seem intent on NOT finding.
We can debate those sources in this ballot and to suggest therwise is ridiculous AND to infer that a source is somehow more reliable and honest when place in the ballot comment box is idiocy of the highest order.
AND we're still waiting for solid physical evidence.
you have to give them time to make it.
Lovelynice said "Cite a credible expert on demolitions at the very least for the claim of it taking "month"
Lovelynice, you may be interested in the following movie, in which YOUR credible, reliable "expert" Jowenko, says that the controlled demolition theory of the WTC towers, was not only complete rubbish, put actually "impossible". Not only that, but they would also taken a year to set up with explosives.
youtube . com / watch ? v = VlOG3g - mOXU&eurl =
Voted : There was no conspiracy therefore there was no evidence.
Never seen any physical evidence yet. Not one iota. And of course there never will be because there is none. Nada, nil, zilch, zero.
I have. 
Shame you don't find the time to show us where your 'evidence', is Ken.
Obviously. Well obviously to any person with a correctly functioning brain. Wide head of knowledge. You have got to give up trying to reason with these people. I have worked in the mental health environment and I have to tell you that hanging out with paranoid delusional people for too long is bad for any sane, reasonable or rational person. You have to walk away for your own sake.
Voted : Evidence is irrelevant.
Evidence is irrelevant when you can copy/paste completely made up information from websites, including quotes from completely discredited professors and, in some cases, quotes by completely made up characters (such as the two 'pilots' who turned out to be completely made up, who said 'there is no way someone could fly a plane that size into the towers')
Hell if you can make stuff up and if you believe the other made up stuff, who needs the truth, right?
Welcome to another horribly unreliable vote-spammned ballot with no crediblility whatsoever.
Watch as the votes for the vote-spammer's voices climb by upto hundreds of votes a day as he tries desperately to compensate for his small mind and flacid impotency.
Thoroughly vote-spammed ballot with a totally meaningless result so far removed from reality and any presented evidence, that you have to wonder why anyone posts these kinds of ballots. Propaganda games, maybe.
Where's some real video of a huge plane hitting the Pentagon? You can't show any.
When is that you are you going to explain how it is possible for all the supports on a floor (both the undamaged structural supports and the damaged ones in varying amounts of damage), to fail on all sides of a building - at the exact same time - not just in 1 building, but in all 3 buildings on the same day?
When is that you are you going to provide links, quotes, and sources to back your claims about the cellphones, and show a scientific study that shows that cellphones can make successful many-minutes-long calls from passenger jets flying at passenger jet speeds, and at passenger jet altitudes?
When is that you are you going to cite any event where steel-framed hi-rises collapsed straight-down into their bases any time in the entire history of steel-framed hi-rise buildings without a controlled demolition being the cause - apart from the 3 buildings of 9-11 (WTC 1, 2, 7)?
When will you back your point of view about 9-11 with a link, source, and quote from somebody, anybody, whose mathematical simulation or computer simulation based on the empirical data (without distortion, deviation, or bullshit fictions) proves that there was enough energy for a gravity-driven collapse?
Please explain WHY if it was floors collapsing, then how the explosions were blowing out floors BEFORE those floors from above could reach them? This is visible on the videos in slow motion - you can see such on this video showing explosions going off many stories below the collapse, and eyewitness accounts of secondary explosions as well as their reporting of the first big explosions happening BELOW the plane impact point. Witnesses confirm this;
video . google . com / videoplay ? docid = 3249714675910247150 & q = 911 & h l = en
Please explain why the seismic tremors were shorter than the collapse times, and cite at least a couple of geologists and/seismic experts explaining this - because according to everyone I've asked, this is impossible and shows that the energy source for the tremors was not the collapsing buildings but could only be from another source (explosions).
You've been asked to provide real answers to many of these questions asked by Ken from Dublin, Lovelynice, Meteor7, Coldcircuit, Blackcat06, Tank Girl, but you have never answered them
What do you mean there is no solid evidence?
Professor Steven Jones and his X-ray spectrometry evidence from samples taken at the WTC site show a perfect match for for the highly specialized compound "thermate" (used for cutting through steel) found in the WTC debris. (And no, thermate was NOT used during the clean up operation...this stuff was in the building, and ignited, prior to collapse.) If you're new to this information, you might want to check out "Molten Metal" and "Fire Initiated Collapse - Primary Arguments Against"
stopthelie . com / the _ evidence _is _ in . ht ml
You should also look up Steven Jones lecture on the subject which is available on video.
And once again we have to ask...
Do you have any clue as to how much thermate would be required? Do you realise it doesn't detonate like dynamite?
Do you know how the material was put in place without anyone knowing?
About 600kg and a little less.
Nobody said it was ONLY thermate used. So, you're just playing around with strawmen there.
The demolition of the Landmark building only required 190kgs of demo-charges. Scaling up to the Twin Towers would only require around 560kgs of demo-charges. Not much at all.
"Nobody said it was ONLY thermate used"
So where's the traces of the other chemicals?
"Scaling up to the Twin Towers..."
Would be a fallacious line of reasoning entirely so let's nip that in the bud.
Bottom line is this: there is no physical evidence for a controlled demolition that stands up to ANY scrutiny and your constant referral to dicredited analysis of seismographs and misinterpretation by non-experts of video evidence is merely pissing in the wind.
|
