Search Amazon.com:
Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«4 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Tremor08
May 20, 2007


I challenge anyone to go to http://www.ae911truth.org

Watch the full blueprint for truth video, and formulate a well composed rebuttal.

GO!

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Happydayz
Jan 6, 2001



Two large passenger planes crashed into the buildings, thereby weakening the structural integrity of the buildings and causing them to collapse in on themselves

Vernii
Dec 7, 2006



Tremor08 posted:

I challenge anyone to go to http://www.ae911truth.org

Watch the full blueprint for truth video, and formulate a well composed rebuttal.

GO!

Is this a loving joke?

QuarkJets
Sep 8, 2008

Donald 'Duck' Dunn: "We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline."

(QuackJets.)
~SMcD


This post belongs in LF or maybe GBS, you're in the wrong forum

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


LOL.

But how do you explain this 47 story highrise that was NOT hit by an airplane collapsing as seen here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

Same day.

Oh that's right, you don't know about this building.

Willie Tomg
Feb 2, 2006

Do Randroids Dream of Objective Sheep?

Tremor08 posted:

LOL.

But how do you explain this 47 story highrise that was NOT hit by an airplane collapsing as seen here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

Same day.

Oh that's right, you don't know about this building.

Things that are not planes can destroy buildings.

~~therefore!~~

Planes cannot destroy buildings.


D&D status: owned

Willie Tomg
Feb 2, 2006

Do Randroids Dream of Objective Sheep?

seriously though you are mostly loving retarded and should fix that before coming back

Evil Fluffy
Jul 13, 2009

Nothing stops this train. We're just getting started.


Rosie O'Donnell said jet fuel can't burn hot enough to melt steel, this is also proof that the two planes smashing into buildings at high speed didn't cause their structural integrity to be compromised.

And isn't WTC 7 the building that, prior to it going down, is seen with one of its sides battered to hell due tpo the debris from the towers?

Math Rocker
Sep 21, 2003

by Ozma


I blew the towers up. case closed

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


Battered or not, it can't cause freefall, it ignores simple physics.

The collapse would follow the path of least resistance.

If it was battered on one side, it would fall to one side.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk

Tremor08 fucked around with this message at Jan 5, 2010 around 03:20

Orange Carebear
Aug 25, 2009


Tremor08 posted:

LOL.

But how do you explain this 47 story highrise that was NOT hit by an airplane collapsing as seen here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

Same day.

Oh that's right, you don't know about this building.

Fires started by falling debris were unable to be put out because of low water pressure and, after smoldering all afternoon, a catastrophic building wide structural failure was triggered by the collapse of key columns.

I honestly didn't think there were that many people out there still clinging to the conspiracy theories.

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk

For a building to fall like that, all columns must fail simultaneously.

This is proven fact... don't mess.

Tremor08 fucked around with this message at Jan 5, 2010 around 03:23

Orange Carebear
Aug 25, 2009


Tremor08 posted:

Battered or not, it can't cause freefall, it ignores simple physics.

The collapse would follow the path of least resistance.

If it was battered on one side, it would fall to one side.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk

There was a 10 story gash that penetrated an estimated 1/4 of the way through WTC 7 and while it is believed that this is the initial event that triggered small fires (fires that grew out of control because of a lack of water pressure to fight them and engineering failures in the sprinkler system), it doesn't seem to have been what caused WTC 7 to collapse. Rather, the fires burned out of control on many floors and support columns across the building were destroyed. There is further video evidence that shows that the penthouse actually collapsed before the building wide failure was triggered.

flux_core
Feb 26, 2007

Not recommended on thin sections.


Since this is D&D, why not put up some evidence about how WTC7 fell the way it did?

Anosmoman
Jun 15, 2006



Tremor08 posted:

Battered or not, it can't cause freefall, it ignores simple physics.

The collapse would follow the path of least resistance.

If it was battered on one side, it would fall to one side.

And why would they make a controlled explosion in wtc7 when 1) The destruction of it would be insignificant compared to the towers and 2) Why wait to detonate the charges? 3) Having it topple over would cause more destruction so planting charges is just a risky waste of time.

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


Anosmoman posted:

And why would they make a controlled explosion in wtc7 when 1) The destruction of it would be insignificant compared to the towers and 2) Why wait to detonate the charges? 3) Having it topple over would cause more destruction so planting charges is just a risky waste of time.

Because 3 months prior the owner of all three buildings signed a new lease stating that if they were hit in a terrorist attack he would be exempt from the 99 year lease and would be able to collect on damages..

which he did, netting 3 billion dollars.

also, they used nanothermite, not regular incediaries

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/c...0001/7TOCPJ.SGM

karthun
Nov 16, 2006

WHERE'S YOUR GOD NOW SOCIALISTS?





Tremor08 posted:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk

For a building to fall like that, all columns must fail simultaneously.

This is proven fact... don't mess.

WTC was made without columns, the weight of the building was carried by the outside frame of the building. If you don't even know how the WTC was constructed how do you know how it was destroyed?

Evil Fluffy
Jul 13, 2009

Nothing stops this train. We're just getting started.


Tremor08 posted:

Because 3 months prior the owner of all three buildings signed a new lease stating that if they were hit in a terrorist attack he would be exempt from the 99 year lease and would be able to collect on damages..

which he did, netting 3 billion dollars.

also, they used nanothermite, not regular incediaries

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/c...0001/7TOCPJ.SGM

It's a good thing he planted those charges when he did, and that he was lucky enough to have the government fly planes into two buildings worth dozens of times more than his, attack the pentagon, and have another flight go down in Pennsylvania, for 3 billion dollars.

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


Every war needs an inciting incident.

Orange Carebear
Aug 25, 2009


karthun posted:

WTC was made without columns, the weight of the building was carried by the outside frame of the building. If you don't even know how the WTC was constructed how do you know how it was destroyed?

Get out of here with your logic! Every building using steel is constructed in the EXACT same way and so you can totally show one building burning and then a second burning and they will be the same!

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


karthun posted:

WTC was made without columns, the weight of the building was carried by the outside frame of the building. If you don't even know how the WTC was constructed how do you know how it was destroyed?

Absolutely wrong

http://www.ae911truth.org/WTC1_blueprints.php


The blueprints of the building are clearly more factual than your misinformed opinion of how the building was built, and they show core columns buddy.

Fkin
Apr 19, 2003

by Y Kant Ozma Post


The link isn't goatsee? I am impressed.

My Imaginary GF
Jul 16, 2005

"I wake up some mornings hating me too."

Tremor08 posted:

Every war needs an inciting incident.

Not really, look at Iraq.

Orange Carebear
Aug 25, 2009


Tremor08 posted:

Absolutely wrong

http://www.ae911truth.org/WTC1_blueprints.php

He is talking about WTC 7, not the twin towers.

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


My Imaginary GF posted:

Not really, look at Iraq.

9.11 was the inciting incident, that's what i'm getting at.

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


Orange Carebear posted:

He is talking about WTC 7, not the twin towers.

actually no, he wasn't.

he said wtc, not wtc 7

and wtc 7 has columns as well, and those blueprints can be found online aswell, so you're wrong.

My Imaginary GF
Jul 16, 2005

"I wake up some mornings hating me too."

Tremor08 posted:

9.11 was the inciting incident, that's what i'm getting at.

If you think Bush needed 9/11 to go into Iraq, than you're the fool.

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


My Imaginary GF posted:

If you think Bush needed 9/11 to go into Iraq, than you're the fool.


Did it help or hurt his cause?

Recycle Bin
Feb 7, 2001

I'd rather be a pig than a fascist

So, wait, I'm confused. Were the 9/11 attacks orchestrated by the government as an excuse to start two wars that would cost them billions of dollars, or a billionaire who wanted to commit the most elaborate case of insurance fraud in history?

Orange Carebear
Aug 25, 2009


Nihilanthic posted:

Since this is D&D, why not put up some evidence about how WTC7 fell the way it did?

Here is what we know happened. Giant pieces of debris eviscerated WTC 7, causing a 10 story long cut that went 1/4 of the way through the building. The sprinkler system was poorly designed and essentially was not functioning. Fires started by falling debris burned for hours after the towers went down, as evidenced by the billowing smoke which increased in intensity right up until the moment WTC 7 went down. There were no bangs or explosions as the tower went down.

What does the evidence point to - uncontrolled fire destroying the building or some kind of thermal charges planted before hand destroying a building that was already crippled by the attacks?

teejayh
Feb 12, 2003
A real bastard

At what point do you come in with THERMITE PAINT...

Orange Carebear
Aug 25, 2009


Tremor08 posted:

actually no, he wasn't.

he said wtc, not wtc 7

and wtc 7 has columns as well, and those blueprints can be found online aswell, so you're wrong.

The burden of proof is on the conspiracy theorists and saying "look, the building collapsed kinda like one destroyed by demolitions experts, it was planned!" is not enough to make people like me dismiss all of the evidence that I can see with my eyes.

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


Recycle Bin posted:

So, wait, I'm confused. Were the 9/11 attacks orchestrated by the government as an excuse to start two wars that would cost them billions of dollars, or a billionaire who wanted to commit the most elaborate case of insurance fraud in history?

Well that's the thing.

See... memos came in that the attacks were going to be carried out months in advance.

Remember how bush was blasted continually for ignoring intelligence?

WTC had been denied demolition permits by the port authority over 11 times.

WTC was an aging dinosaur full of absbestos, and to update the building would not be cost effective, but legally, larry silverstein couldn't get away with demolishing the building.

So it became a, you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours situation.

Both buildings had been running evacuation drills for weeks prior.

Most of the deaths were people caught on the upper floors and People killed by debris.

Tremor08
May 20, 2007


Orange Carebear posted:

The burden of proof is on the conspiracy theorists and saying "look, the building collapsed kinda like one destroyed by demolitions experts, it was planned!" is not enough to make people like me dismiss all of the evidence that I can see with my eyes.

You mean like the factual evidence of chemical signatures that are of a high tech incendiary only manufactured in government defense labs appearing in random samplings of wtc dust.

And the fact that wtc first responders are having weird illnesses and cancers due to it?

1.
Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
2.
Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
3.
Extremely rapid onset of destruction
4.
Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
5.
Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 ft at 60 mph
6.
Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
7.
Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
8.
1200-foot-dia. debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
9.
Isolated explosive ejections 20 – 40 stories below demolition front
10.
Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
11.
Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
12.
Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
13.
Evidence of explosives found in dust samples
14.
No precedent for steel-framed high-rise collapse due to fire
And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

1.
Slow onset with large visible deformations
2.
Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3.
Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4.
High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”

Orange Carebear
Aug 25, 2009


Tremor08 posted:

Well that's the thing.

See... memos came in that the attacks were going to be carried out months in advance.

Remember how bush was blasted continually for ignoring intelligence?

WTC had been denied demolition permits by the port authority over 11 times.

WTC was an aging dinosaur full of absbestos, and to update the building would not be cost effective, but legally, larry silverstein couldn't get away with demolishing the building.

So it became a, you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours situation.

Both buildings had been running evacuation drills for weeks prior.

Most of the deaths were people caught on the upper floors and People killed by debris.

I'm still confused. The guy who owned WTC 7 crafted the plan to destroy the twin towers for 3B in insurance money?

flux_core
Feb 26, 2007

Not recommended on thin sections.


Orange Carebear posted:

Here is what we know happened. Giant pieces of debris eviscerated WTC 7, causing a 10 story long cut that went 1/4 of the way through the building. The sprinkler system was poorly designed and essentially was not functioning. Fires started by falling debris burned for hours after the towers went down, as evidenced by the billowing smoke which increased in intensity right up until the moment WTC 7 went down. There were no bangs or explosions as the tower went down.

What does the evidence point to - uncontrolled fire destroying the building or some kind of thermal charges planted before hand destroying a building that was already crippled by the attacks?

I really wish a video of the gigantic cleave taken out of WTC7 existed. Or even a still.

mew force shoelace
Dec 13, 2009

by Ozmaugh


So what was the evil genius's plan with WTC7? that no one would ever notice? that convenient parts will fall on it?

This evil plan makes no sense!

Orange Carebear
Aug 25, 2009


Tremor08 posted:

You mean like the factual evidence of chemical signatures that are of a high tech incendiary only manufactured in government defense labs appearing in random samplings of wtc dust.

And the fact that wtc first responders are having weird illnesses and cancers due to it?

People getting cancer after spending the afternoon breathing burning aspestos dust and smoke? GET OUT.

My Imaginary GF
Jul 16, 2005

"I wake up some mornings hating me too."

Tremor08 posted:

Did it help or hurt his cause?

It helped his pockets.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

karthun
Nov 16, 2006

WHERE'S YOUR GOD NOW SOCIALISTS?





Tremor08 posted:

Absolutely wrong

http://www.ae911truth.org/WTC1_blueprints.php


The blueprints of the building are clearly more factual than your misinformed opinion of how the building was built, and they show core columns buddy.

Please point out the load bearing columns that are not on the outer edge of the building.

  • Post
  • Reply
«4 »