PROOF That The Towers Weren't Destroyed - Over and Over
 

For the consideration of 9/11 conspiracy nuts:



:D

Go take your meds, nutjob.

Where do I send the invoice for my 3 min of time I will never get back. (I couldn't get much further, this guy is lame)

Oh no....

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Q7ObrR7JOq...sCrapAgain.jpg

They should have got William Shatner to narrate the video, then every fucker would believe it.

17 mins is too long..

boring, old, debunked, discredited, fail.

Yeah I agree the presentation is a little stale.... still, if you actually spend the time to watch, there ain't too much there to "debunk". Actually it mostly debunks the "dubunkers" (geeze I can't wait til we come up with better definitions).

:D

So what if Al Quada brought explosives into the building before the planes hit it?

Fantastic.. More info that says the same thing.. No one knows what happened, that many different things could have happened, that there's nothing but conflicting theories and that's all there ever will be.. So everyone is free to make up their own opinion and that opinion reflects their over all world point of view...

People will believe a lie if it's big enough... omg was he right

Actually too bad you didn't watch it. I know, it's poorly set up, but basically the idea is that so far all the theories brought up to rationlized the govet. hypothesis don't hold water, on their own or against each other.

If it booms like a bomb and destroys like a bomb....

Yeah weirdly, Hitler was right about that shit...

the aliens did it... 9/11 tards need to be shot. they're just wasting space on this planet

I did watch it... the sound of an "explosion" does not mean "bomb"... See... Right there is the problem... Everyone that wants to believe it was the government etc assumes bomb FIRST and so they look at everything else as confirming that opinion. With all the shit that would have been going on in those buildings I would expect to hear explosions but that does not mean bomb.

Having said that, this is the first video I've seen that shows that thermite can actually cut through steel whereas I've seen the others that show it doesn't. Of course he also says that jet fuel can't melt/weaken steel but I've seen tests that show that it can. So at the end of the day, more conflicting theories/opinions and so I remain open to all possibilities.

all that shit has be debunked and explained years ago. do you really think anyone is going to bother typing out a reply? grab a brain moran and move on.

Valid question. Who let them in, or gave them access?

Which ones? Those who think a bunch of ragheads controlled by a dude in a cave fresh out of dialysis were able to by-pass the most sophisticated defense systems in the world four times in one day, ultimately hitting the most highly secure and defended building on the planet?

Or like the people who think there's something fishy about that conspiracy theory (hypothesis actually, since theories need some facts to establish them as such)?

Sorry I meant it as an expression, not literal. There were very few actual explosions that day, apparently meant to take out super-reinforced basements and such infrastructure.

Actually it's not the only one, but those that "show" it doesn't are obviously not set up properly. Professionals wouldn't sprinkle some thermite around like the TV show "experts" did and expect it to have an effect...

You've seen "videos" that contradict the laws of physics and demonstrate that turpentine can melt/weaken steal in an open environment? I'd love to see those...

Well actually no none of "that shit" has been debunked by anyone... the point of that video is to show how the "real experts" debunked and contradicted each other.

And you apparently bothered typing out a reply.

My brain is fine, btw. It thinks, it doubts, it doesn't drink the Kool Aid.

.

Temperature didn't even get hot enough to reach the official melting temp of steel. And yet within a few minutes it weakened and collapsed. Who knows what temperatures would have been reached in an enclosed environment. I'm sure there's lots of thing out there to say this test is invalid or whatever, but at the end of the day, no one can say with any certainty what happened in those buildings and so this is just as valid as any other theory.

Most GFY members appear to have made up their minds one way or another on 9/11. If a person places their trust in authority/religion, it will always be difficult to get them to consider evidence that proves the authority/religion to have lied. Some people would need to first have a mental breakdown before they would let go of their current world paradigm.

However, we are now entering a stage where many nice paradigm's are about to be shattered. It will be interesting to see how people's views evolve over the next 12 to 18 months. The UN funded OWS movement is an ominous sign that the Elite are about to trigger some of their nasty plans.

Here's the thing, Greggy ol' chap... the first I don't know... 20 seconds, has "eyewitness" reports of people hearing explosions.

The thing is, most people have never heard what an explosion really sounds like. We've all heard it in the movies, but in real life? Most likely, never.

Even worse, these people are not "eye witnesses" to anything at all. They HEARD what SOUNDED LIKE an explosion. A very fast rush of vibrating air is what you hear during an explosion, but lots of other things can cause the same thing, such as, the COMPRESSION of air due to pressure, heat etc.

The clown in this video has his owned agenda and is clearly heading towards proving his own theory and doesn't approach the tower collapse with an open mind at all.

This is interesting, excepting that there were no "fire pits" in the WTC, most of the fuel was consumed outside the buildings, and that tests by UL reproducing those conditions didn't produce anything near the same "conditions".

The other thing is that no matter where one or two or even a dozen "fire pits" could have been somehow reproduced on that day, they couldn't have reduced all joints, columns and supports to "softness" at the same time to create the symmetrical, jolt-free collapses we saw.

And besides, FEMA and NIST both deny claims that the steel could have reached that fail-safe poiint, globally and uniformally...

That's as misguided an attempt at "experiment" or reproducing the events as sprinkling thermite over the beams (the way the tv "experts" did).

.

again my god

Gee...can't imagine why after what?... 10 years or so, this company isn't a raging success and the default video chat solution. I mean, after all, its ran by such normal, well rounded and intelligent people.

When you have a set opinion it's easy to poke holes in something else but that doesn't mean it didn't happen in some way... No one knows what what going on in there and there's lots of possibilities... The one thing the video proves is that the entire 'laws of physics" argument is invalid since it shows that steel will weaken at temperatures far below it's melting point ie 2000F vs 2600F and that it only takes a few minutes for a collapse to occur at those temperatures.

Here's the great thing about science and the laws of physics.. They apply to specific circumstances.. Once you add in a bunch of variables, unless there is some specific science that also takes into account those variables, you can't point to those laws of physics as proof of anything anymore. All scientific "laws/facts" are only valid with todays knowledge. Tomorrow they could change.

As for the FEMA/NIST thing.. Cherry picking what to believe in their reports and what not to believe is just weak IMO... As I've said before, no one knows what happened in there and no one can ever prove one theory over another. Unless some definitive smoking gun is uncovered, this will forever remain a controversy.

so how actually did the towers collapse ?

what is the official version ?

:thumbsup

You can choose between many official stories you want to believe.

So there is the pancake (1 floor collapse on the other etc etc) conspiracy theory.

And the officefire weakening the steel and concrete cause a total pulveration of the massive buildings.

And an other official theory is the "single point collapse".

The latest theory they invented wich has never been seen or recreated oh what a science "thermal expansion".




And the official story is that they did not find any evidence of explosives because they did not look for it.

I'm still waiting for the final report from...

http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/mythbusters-1.jpg

That would make an interesting show.

This might just be the best explanation I've ever read.

You can take all of the scientific aspects out of it because unless applied to those exact circumstances, it's pointless. We can never recreate the exact environment tha this happened in. This wasn't your typical three story building that caught fire. This was one of the tallest buildings in the world.

There are just way too many variables.

In simple terms, enough damage was done to that building from the plane itself and the resulting fire to cause one floor to pancake into another. Plan and simple.

GFY should have been in charge of figuring out what happened. Not sure why the community is never called upon for such things.

:thumbsup Was thinking the same.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project...erican_Century


Written by Paul Wolfowitz. A zionist who has betrayed America to Israel numerous times.

What would a psychiatrist think of your theories? Honestly?

is it healthy to reflect back on this stuff? Is it productive? Has it made your life any better? Will it ever make your life better or your families?

10 years is a long time...

Here's what the Psychologists think

A psychologist would tell you that its extremely corrosive to a society to continually obsess on these things. Particularly so, 10 years after the fact. A healthy, reasonable and well adjusted person moves on.

It's a reflection on the sheer volume of mentally unstable individuals in our nation more than anything. Before the web, we would have never really known or seen it. We all just know there is that one creepy guy down the road who you never talk to about JFK. Now we have a more accurate means to measure and witness them all in their full glory like an endless parade of bi-polar, schizophrenic, emotionally abused, clinically paranoid and otherwise emotionally traumatized and damaged people venting and directing/projecting their issues at or on to the highest authority symbols.

Inside jobs can happen in other countries, but America is exceptional, inside jobs do not happen in America. :upsidedow

Lets not forget other history that has been swept under the rug.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

Surprising that you never see any Hollywood films about these two incidents.

Anyone can argue that anything is possible. It doesn't require sound reason or a clear mind. It certainly doesn't require one to be right as a prerequisite. 9/11 is perfect fodder for those who are deranged and in desperate need of help. It's the perfect object to point at and say "see, I told you so, the problem is not me... the problem is over there".

9/11 is the new JFK and after 30 years of hearing about it, it will be replaced by something else.

In the meantime, the earth will keep turning on its axis and all this frantic behavior by the clinically ill, will have changed nothing,.. because after all, the intent is not to affect change, the true purpose is to vent and to project ones own emotional issues on to something else.

:2 cents:

http://www.diamond-jim.com/911folds/pics/07fold.gif

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-..._7180292_n.jpg

:anon :helpme :winkwink:

ADG

:1orglaugh:thumbsup

What a fucking retard this guy is. Unbelievable.

Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and hobbies. :)

I have more than a passing interest in science, physics (even Astrophysics) so when Mediaguy says the words "controlled demolition", I start calling up everything that I think I know and challenge him on it. To me it looks like a collapse, and nothing at all like a controlled demolition. Mediaguy believes just the opposite, which in turn begins yet another spirited debate on the subject. I'll never agree with him (nor he with me), but 9/11 Conspiracy theories are fun to talk about, and for me anyway, creates a lot of critical thinking.

So of course Squealer, we've had some missteps business-wise, and business for us is slower these days just as I'm sure it is for many others here. Try not to dismiss media guy (or our product and services) for his thoughts on 9/11. I certainly don't. Instead, if you're interested, challenge his ideas, enjoy the conversations and arguments, and do some research and draw your own conclusions.

I suppose that's one way of looking at it.

On the other hand, the way I see it is, I don't want to have anything to do with a company that has employees that may well interact with my account and mistakenly believe shit like this constitutes any kind of "proof". Your employees are a reflection of your company. To me, Media Guy reflects badly on your company.

To each their own I suppose. :2 cents:

Your government has actually provided little or no proof of their version of their story, much along the lines of the Iraq WMDs or that little "nurse" who testified that Hussein's soldiers were yanking babies out of nurseries in the first Gulf war back in the 90s.

I do my research and come to what I now contend from some evidentiary basis, to my way of seeing things.

I believe that my conclusions are sound, and relate them without guile and to the risk of my credibility or personal reputation based on personal ethics and judgement.

In no way would this or that affect my "interaction" with your account or allow anything outside of dollars and cents permit me to treat you with anything less than full respect for your beliefs, business or bullshit. Even in these forums I don't call names or react harshly or without providing benefit of the doubt and room to question.

Ask Rochard, my sparring partner ;)

Let's say I believe in a woman's choice on abortion, and that's not your credence... would you think that reflects badly on us?

Do you think investing in 2much.net would be endorsing any beliefs that aren't yours, pro or con? Could you really conduct business with anyone in the world if it had to be based on their full set of beliefs and philosophy matching yours?

Get a better reason. No, actually, get a reason.

.

Oh and heads up btw you should give WebAir a call: http://www.teeniegirlgalleries.com/

:D