[9/11] Let's have a discussion. by Scuzzle - Page 11 - TribalWar Forums
Click Here to find great hosting deals from Branzone.com


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page [9/11] Let's have a discussion.
Page 11 of 13
Thread Tools
Redwood
VeteranXV
Old
201 - 07-07-2008, 22:20
Reply With Quote
http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm

Who wants to sift through it?
 
Redwood is offline
 
Sponsored Links
fartiusstinkius
VeteranXV
Old
202 - 07-07-2008, 22:21
Reply With Quote
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.
 
fartiusstinkius is offline
 
28K Modem
VeteranX
Contributor
Old
203 - 07-07-2008, 22:25
Reply With Quote
9/11 conspiracy theorists are so out of touch with reality. they are the laughing stock of the nation.
 
28K Modem is offline
 
escapedturkey
Veteran4
Old
204 - 07-07-2008, 22:27
Reply With Quote
 
escapedturkey is offline
 
DiSk
VeteranX
Old
205 - 07-07-2008, 22:31
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by 28K Modem View Post
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 is offline
 
DiSk
VeteranX
Old
206 - 07-07-2008, 22:31
Reply With Quote
nist also claims there is no proof of molten steel..
 
DiSk is offline
 
JoMo
VeteranXV
Immigrant
Old
207 - 07-07-2008, 22:34
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiSk View Post
nist also claims there is no proof of molten steel..
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.
 
JoMo is offline
 
cyclozine
VeteranXX
Old
208 - 07-07-2008, 22:37
Reply With Quote
probably because there is zero evidence for pools of molten steel
 
cyclozine is offline
 
DiSk
VeteranX
Old
209 - 07-07-2008, 22:38
Reply With Quote
......................... ......................... ....................
 
DiSk is offline
 
cyclozine
VeteranXX
Old
210 - 07-07-2008, 22:39
Reply With Quote
 
cyclozine is offline
 
DudeofDeath
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
211 - 07-07-2008, 22:41
Reply With Quote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v36bkCB8sTY&hl
Molten Steel that NIST denies
 
DudeofDeath is offline
 
JoMo
VeteranXV
Immigrant
Old
212 - 07-07-2008, 22:41
Reply With Quote
*not watching any videos*

Type it.
 
JoMo is offline
 
cyclozine
VeteranXX
Old
213 - 07-07-2008, 22:43
Reply With Quote
4 real
 
cyclozine is offline
 
DudeofDeath
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
214 - 07-07-2008, 22:54
Reply With Quote
911 Photo Gallery
 
DudeofDeath is offline
 
cyclozine
VeteranXX
Old
215 - 07-07-2008, 22:55
Reply With Quote
it's awesome how they start off with the conclusion that it's steel
 
cyclozine is offline
 
Dat
VeteranX
Old
216 - 07-07-2008, 23:21
Reply With Quote
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.
 
Dat is offline
 
JuggerNaught
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
217 - 07-07-2008, 23:26
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dat View Post
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
 
JuggerNaught is offline
 
JoMo
VeteranXV
Immigrant
Old
218 - 07-07-2008, 23:28
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DudeofDeath View Post
911 Photo Gallery
Saw the first pic, realized they were dumb.

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

/sarcasm>
 
JoMo is offline
 
DudeofDeath
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
219 - 07-07-2008, 23:37
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dat View Post
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
 
DudeofDeath is offline
 
Dat
VeteranX
Old
220 - 07-07-2008, 23:46
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuggerNaught View Post
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?
 
Dat is offline
 
Page 11 of 13
Reply


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page [9/11] Let's have a discussion.

Social Website Bullshit

Tags
aj is a pedophile , brontez = complete idiot , here is what i believe , incoming conspiracy fucks , jews did 9/11 , lalala cant hear you , missle , orbital123tinfoil , robert plant , sheeple , suicidetaxi is god , tinfoil


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


AGENT: CCBot/2.0 (https://commoncrawl.org/faq/) / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 20:23.