Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
TribalWar Forums
Page 11 of 13

TribalWar Forums (https://www.tribalwar.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Discussion (https://www.tribalwar.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   [9/11] Let's have a discussion. (https://www.tribalwar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=548469)

Redwood 07-07-2008 22:20

http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm

Who wants to sift through it?

fartiusstinkius 07-07-2008 22:21

These threads are great at seeing how different people reason and the public's different levels of understanding of logic, physical theories, and the interplay between those two concepts.

It's quite interesting.

28K Modem 07-07-2008 22:25

9/11 conspiracy theorists are so out of touch with reality. they are the laughing stock of the nation.

escapedturkey 07-07-2008 22:27

http://www.coasttocoastam.com/timage...ien090607a.jpg

DiSk 07-07-2008 22:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by 28K Modem (Post 13427317)
9/11 conspiracy theorists are so out of touch with reality. they are the laughing stock of the nation.

Or maybe, you're willfully ignorant!

Just.. maybe...

DiSk 07-07-2008 22:31

nist also claims there is no proof of molten steel.. :lol:

JoMo 07-07-2008 22:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by DiSk (Post 13427345)
nist also claims there is no proof of molten steel.. :lol:

I don't believe there ever was? If there was molten steel it was under the pile of rubble where insulation effects caused more heat.

cyclozine 07-07-2008 22:37

probably because there is zero evidence for pools of molten steel

DiSk 07-07-2008 22:38

......................... ......................... ....................

cyclozine 07-07-2008 22:39

:lol:

DudeofDeath 07-07-2008 22:41

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v36bkCB8sTY&hl
Molten Steel that NIST denies

JoMo 07-07-2008 22:41

*not watching any videos*

Type it.

cyclozine 07-07-2008 22:43

4 real

DudeofDeath 07-07-2008 22:54

911 Photo Gallery

cyclozine 07-07-2008 22:55

it's awesome how they start off with the conclusion that it's steel

Dat 07-07-2008 23:21

The more I read from 9/11 truthers, the more I start to realize that their entire argument boils down to looking at photographs or videos of the attacks and saying "Well that's not what I'd expect to happen!"

Take the nuts who think that a missile hit the pentagon, for instance. You'd have to believe that the government hijacked a plane with ~58 people on board, disappeared the entire plane along with all of its passengers, flew another aircraft capable of firing a missile to the Pentagon (which is close to a crowded highway), hit the Pentagon with said missile, placed large amounts of airplane wreckage at the site, and did all of this in broad daylight when many of the above activities could be clearly seen.

That plan by itself is pretty damn stupid, but it's even worse when you realize that it would have been infinitely more easy to just crash the plane into the Pentagon. The second scenario wouldn't even contradict their broader beliefs about a 9/11 conspiracy; the only thing they would have to abandon is the belief that a missile struck the Pentagon. Yet they still cling to that view, as convoluted and ridiculous as it is, because they saw a few pictures of the Pentagon lawn after the attack and, well, it just doesn't look how they expected it would.

JuggerNaught 07-07-2008 23:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dat (Post 13427508)
The more I read from 9/11 truthers, the more I start to realize that their entire argument boils down to looking at photographs or videos of the attacks and saying "Well that's not what I'd expect to happen!"

Take the nuts who think that a missile hit the pentagon, for instance. You'd have to believe that the government hijacked a plane with ~58 people on board, disappeared the entire plane along with all of its passengers, flew another aircraft capable of firing a missile to the Pentagon (which is close to a crowded highway), hit the Pentagon with said missile, placed large amounts of airplane wreckage at the site, and did all of this in broad daylight when many of the above activities could be clearly seen.

That plan by itself is pretty damn stupid, but it's even worse when you realize that it would have been infinitely more easy to just crash the plane into the Pentagon. The second scenario wouldn't even contradict their broader beliefs about a 9/11 conspiracy; the only thing they would have to abandon is the belief that a missile struck the Pentagon. Yet they still cling to that view, as convoluted and ridiculous as it is, because they saw a few pictures of the Pentagon lawn after the attack and, well, it just doesn't look how they expected it would.

Or you would have to believe that there never was a passenger plane to begin with and the pentagon was hit by a much smaller aircraft

JoMo 07-07-2008 23:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by DudeofDeath (Post 13427438)

Saw the first pic, realized they were dumb.

It's not like there's metal stuff in an office building ya know?

/sarcasm>

DudeofDeath 07-07-2008 23:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dat (Post 13427508)
You'd have to believe that the government hijacked a plane with ~58 people on board, disappeared the entire plane along with all of its passengers, flew another aircraft capable of firing a missile to the Pentagon (which is close to a crowded highway), hit the Pentagon with said missile, placed large amounts of airplane wreckage at the site, and did all of this in broad daylight when many of the above activities could be clearly seen.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8mGvFzvwFM&eurl
There was very little wreckage at the Pentagon, similiar to Flight 93.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHFjf6fwnj4
Line of Civilians Removing Evidence from Pentagon

Dat 07-07-2008 23:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by JuggerNaught (Post 13427527)
Or you would have to believe that there never was a passenger plane to begin with and the pentagon was hit by a much smaller aircraft

Why would they do that when they could just abduct a passenger plane like they did with Flights 11 and 175?

What about the identities of the people listed as being aboard Flight 77, were they created out of thin air by the government along with their families?

And again, why would you carry out of all this when the plane would be so easily viewable by so many people?


Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:23.
Page 11 of 13

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2003, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All Content Copyright 1999-2020 Tribalwar.Com, LLC