Discussion: Was 9/11 an inside job?

Discussion in 'Formal debates' started by scott3x, Feb 19, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    For one, I mean that 9/11 is a conspiracy regardless of whether you go for the official story's arab hijackers or the idea that it was an inside job; people had to conspire together to make it happen.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    I never said it was, although it is a branch of government.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2009
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. psikeyhackr Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,020
    .
    The physicists are way too busy.

    There are just SO MANY crime scenes where 1300 foot buildings have collapsed the physicists just can't keep up.

    You will have to schedule an appointment with them.

    psik
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    well don't say "the government" when you mean the supreme court.
    actually the supreme court is the highest department of one branch, the judicial.
     
  8. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    Laugh

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    . Fortunately, atleast one physicist has made the time to look into the matter thoroughly; Steven Jones.
     
  9. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    I didn't mean the supreme court. I was speaking of the The House Select Committee on Assasinations conclusions in 1979. No idea where John got this Supreme Court idea. I suppose you'll next say that said committee isn't the government either; fine, it's also just a part of government, but it's the part that was charged to find out the truth concerning the JFK assassination. I assume there was this new investigation because enough people found the Warren Commission to be woefully lacking. Its conclusions still leave much to be desired, but it was a step in the right direction, atleast.


    Good point.
     
  10. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    you really dont know anything about criminal investigations. As it stands now your coming across as very immature.
     
  11. psikeyhackr Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,020
    .
    You are of course free to provide a list of all criminal investigations that involve the destruction of buildings over 100,000 tons in mass. You can pretend that this is like any other criminal investigation all you want.

    Talking about the psychology without being sure about the physics simply demonstrates how idiotic psychologists are. Psychology is the study of not thinking. Education is the encouragement of not thinking.

    How are we going to cure the psychologists and psychiatrists of 911 psychosis?

    The new global issue confronting mankind. :roflmao:

    psik
     
  12. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    i have no idea what you are talking about toofer.
     
  13. RonWieck Registered Member

    Messages:
    43
    Yawn. You will prance around your obvious agenda until pinned down. Let's see: you pretend that you discovered through magic that the cause of the collapse of the towers settled on by serious researchers isn't true. You couldn't have made your discovery in any other manner, as your discovery relies on nothing recognized by science. You are someone who has no background in physics or engineering and who displays a very poor grasp of those subjects. You boast about your ineducability. Are we supposed to conclude that your total inability to comprehend anything real engineers write is the result of your lack of intelligence, or should we make the more likely assumption that you, like all twoofers, simply can't abide the fact that America was attacked without provocation by jihadists, people who had been attacking American interests for a decade?

    YOU desperately need someone to tell you, if not what to think, at least how to think. Thinking is not an activity for which you display any talent.
     
  14. RonWieck Registered Member

    Messages:
    43

    Gee, it kind of makes you wonder why his associates are all frauds and his department rebuked him for failure to maintain professional standards. Do you regard his refusal to share his work with other scientists as an example of his thoroughness? How about his refusal to submit any of his "work" for peer-review (no, the shabby pay-for-play vanity journal that published his worthless paper does not qualify)?
     
  15. RonWieck Registered Member

    Messages:
    43

    The jihadist attacks were a conspiracy in the same sense that the invasion at Normandy was a conspiracy. The jihadists declared war on the U.S. in the 90s. The attacks of 9/11/01 were the most spectacular in a series of strikes at American interests.
     
  16. RonWieck Registered Member

    Messages:
    43

    You've been caught lying. The "government" does not "admit" that Oswald could not have acted alone. It has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that he did, in fact, act alone. It's funny that people cling to their fantasies about the JFK assassination, although the evidence for Oswald's guilt is simply overwhelming, while evidence for a conspiracy is nonexistent.
     
  17. psikeyhackr Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,020
    .
    And all you can come up with name calling psychological bullshit.

    You can't come up with the distribution of mass on a skyscraper you BELIEVE could collapse from the top down.

    I demonstrated with REAL PHYSICS, that anyone can duplicate for themselves, that MASS combined with STRUCTURAL SUPPORT stops a falling mass driven by gravity faster than those same supports alone. But you don't have sense enough to ask about the distribution of mass in a skyscraper and then you have the nerve to talk about an INVESTIGATION.

    You can't recognize an incompetent investigation in the NIST report.

    Ask Wieck "Brain" Ron to show you the data on the perimeter wall panels.

    :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

    psik
     
  18. Headspin Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    496
    "I saw a man fire from behind the wooden fence"
    - Jean Hill.

    Will you retract your statement that the "evidence for a JFK conspiracy is nonexistent"?

    I suspect that you will just mantra your "no evidence" bullshit, as you consistently do with 911 matters.
     
  19. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    no wonder you believe in conspiracy theories.
     
  20. dMx9 Registered Member

    Messages:
    25
    Personalize less, stay on-topic more. Derail much, John99?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    Scott knows what i am referring to so dont try and cause trouble.
     
  22. scott3x Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,785
    Yes, I do, but dMx has a point; it wasn't on topic. Neither is the JFK stuff, ofcourse. I'm thinking perhaps we could move that part over to the history forum, as Pearl Harbor was over there in the past...
     
  23. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    D, like all the Moderators I received your complaint about the quality of the discourse on this thread. I know that I promised--twice--that if I received one more complaint about a debate that I'm not even reading, I would shut it down. However, I find your complaint to be a gross overreaction and I would like YOU to settle down. Yes there have been some personal insults but they were based on reasonable inferences from the things people said. We have to tolerate that on SciForums or we'd all be banned. There has been a little off-topic meandering, but the debate is still moving along. I can't say if it's moving forward because I don't follow it. I have a hard time imagining that this group of amateurs is covering any new ground after so many pages, but I'll be damned if I'm going to read the whole bloody thing in order to make that determination.

    I work in the Washington metropolitan area among several million people whose lives were touched by the events of 9/11. I don't think anyone I've met is more than four degrees of separation from a victim, survivor or witness. Neighbor's-daughter's-teacher's-husband, for example. A huge portion of these people work for or with the federal government and know very well from experience that the things it says must not be automatically believed. And every one of them is satisfied with the chain of evidence supporting the conclusion that the Pentagon was indeed hit by an airliner.

    So forgive me if I don't feel like spending my time following a debate over what I consider a typical crackpot conspiracy theory by people who don't think the Bush Dynasty already has enough blemishes on its record to be remembered as the most evil family in American history.

    That said, as long as I'm here, I will point out some of the things you brought up.
    John, this is a formal debate. The discourse is held to a higher standard than the rest of this website. If you have evidence to support that assertion, you are hereby challenged to present it immediately, or else you must never make this point again, on this thread or any other.
    The same challenge applies to this assertion. You can get away with crap like this on the other boards, but not here. This is not the place for quasi-racist propaganda against a nation.
    If this is indeed a fact, please point us to the reference material for it.
    DMX complained about this, and then admitted that he doesn't know what "toofer" means. Apparently they don't have Google in the country he lives in.

    Toofer is a slang word for a Canadian, named after the way their beer is packaged. As far as I can tell it's not considered an insult.

    So:

    JOHN. Dial it back please, and stop making extraordinary assertions without providing extraordinary evidence. That's a violation of the Rule of Laplace, a cornerstone of the scientific method.

    DMX. Settle down, Beavis. This is not a university.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page