World trade centre collapse, 9/11 conspiracy

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by someguy1, Nov 4, 2017.

  1. psikeyhackr Live Long and Suffer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,192
    Great response to the grade school math with the blocks. ROFL

    It is all MY fault that you spend time responding to posts that you apparently cannot understand.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,055

    Explain using simple English what you think happened and offer evidence.

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,194
    That's not generally something conspiracy theorists can do. They just don't do math, or logic, or evidence. Their strategy is generally:

    1) Post a link to a two hour video.
    2) If anyone questions it, reply "Just watch the video! It's all there!"
    3) If people persist, choose a datum that is hard to find and use that as "proof" that there is a coverup. "Why are they hiding what the temperature was in subbasement 3 of WTC1 40 seconds before the collapse? WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO COVER UP?"

    And repeat.
     
    James R likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,055
    Even entry-level conspiracists tend to have an idea of what they think is being conspired.

    psihacklolpwn1 doesn't even seem to have that. By any measure, he doesn't even rise to the level of conspiracy theorist; merely conspiracy troll.
     
  8. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,194
    Good point. Trolls don't try to convince anyone of their thesis; they just want to cause trouble on forums.
     
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,380
    The explanation is already sitting there for your perusal. Read the previously-linked snopes article on this particular conspiracy rubbish.
     
  10. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,690
    Is this your way of engineering a life ban? Drawing me into resuming discussion of an aspect of 9-11 that thanks to both your's and bell's anti-true-free-speech threats/warnings, I'm FORBIDDEN to talk about! All I can and will 'safely' say is the Snopes article is imo very narrow in its focus and very weak even there.

    The other pro Official Conspiracy Theory posters here have been given ample material establishing the true smoking gun re physical evidence of massive incendiary usage to weaken the WTC towers prior to collapse. With just one entirely implausible conjecture offered as counterargument. I'm fed up with your and their tactics.

    Leaving you all with link to a brief article (nice pictures - worth a thousand words in themselves) to just maybe think honestly about:
    https://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/WTC_apndxC.htm

    And no, gypsum board in the rubble can't possibly explain the sulfur erosion FEMA investigators discovered. They were obviously constrained to leave it categorized as 'an on-going mystery'.

    Over and OUT.
     
  11. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,194
    Explanation from the article: "It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings."

    Maybe just honestly think about that for a few minutes.
     
  12. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,380
    It's your way of engineering a life ban, is it not?
    You would say that, of course, because it's all join-the-dots when you're a conspiracy theorist. Everything has to be connected to the conspiracy - somehow. If it doesn't seem to connect at first, you can always find a way to shoehorn it in.
    There are "official" conspiracy theory posters here? Who appointed them?

    Or do you mean there's an Official Conspiracy Theory? What made it official? Who made it official? Whose offices are you deferring to, specifically?
    You mean like crashing some large jets laden with fuel into buildings? That does tend to weaken them.
    Flounce again? Are you for real this time, or will you be back again, only to flounce yourself out yet again?
     
  13. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,690
    I have spent more than a few minutes doing so, whereas you once again home in to cherry pick anything seemingly bolstering the Official Story.
    No doubt being keenly aware of the politically charged climate, it was out of the question for the FEMA personnel involved to even suggest the possibility of sulfur containing thermate incendiary cutters as screeming obvious explanation.

    Their report would never have seen the light of day.Hence that purely hand-wavy speculation.
    But note even that itself implied at minimum sustained very high temperatures. Something your 'spot welding' of chaotically tumbling steel girders nonsense could never provide.
    Or you can provide a link to at least one credible analysis backing such a bizarre hypothesis?

    I will take a raft of eyewitness testimony to the presence of massive quantities of flowing and pooled molten steel, persisting in places for weeks after 9-11-2001:
    https://off-guardian.org/2016/10/01...-no-evidence-of-high-temps-in-the-wtc-rubble/
     
  14. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,690
    How so? YOU revived that topic. Irresponsibly - given YOU had issued several stern warnings to drop it! Such a hypocrite.
    Says you.
    Don't play dumb yet again.
    And that jet fuel - what was left of it following the massive fireballs upon impact - somehow explains all the molten steel found for weeks after?! Still playing real dumb.
    Ha ha ha ha. James R has picked up the latest derogatory buzz word doing the rounds here. Well done!
     
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,380
    It's completely ridiculous that conspiracy theorists are still trotting out the same tired arguments 20 years on from the events, especially as those arguments were all addressed and debunked at the time.

    Talk about being stuck in a fantasist's time warp. Don't you guys have anything better to do? There are plenty of new vaccine conspiracies you could promote, for instance. At least that's sort of new(ish). What about 5G causing Covid, or something?

    (Actually, I appreciate that you actually don't have anything better to do. When conspiracy theories are your life, you believe in all of them, and I guess that's how you spend a lot of your time. JFK this week. UFOs next week. Injecting bleach to cure Covid the week after. Opus Dei and the Templars the week after that. Big Pharma. The Illuminati. The mind just skips from one to the next. As it gets tired of one, it moves to the next for a while, knowing that the other one will still be there to revist 2 or 5 or 20 or 60 years on. This is your life.)
     
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,380
    As predicted, you couldn't stay out. Ha ha ha! Well Done!
     
  17. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,690
    You presume too much. And your accusations are baseless and basically just provocative dung droppings.
     
  18. Q-reeus Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,690
    You lot stop replying to me, and I'll gladly reciprocate. Well, let's see.
     
  19. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,380
    Jolly hockey sticks! Yes, let's see!
     
  20. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,338
    I know, it is so odd. It is clear to me that Q-reeus is a reasonably intelligent fellow and yet here he is supporting this silly conspiracy crap. It boggles my mind...
     
  21. psikeyhackr Live Long and Suffer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,192
    Figuring out what could and could not happen versus BELIEVING what happened are very different things.

    Accurate data on initial conditions is mandatory.

    I am not interested in BELIEVING ANYTHING!

    BELIEF is for MORONS!
     
  22. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,194
    Nothing there proves it was molten steel rather than molten aluminum. There were plenty of people who said they saw weakened and bent steel, which is exactly what you would expect after a 1000C fire. There were plenty of rivers of molten metal; also exactly what you would expect, since aluminum melts at 600C. The eyewitness accounts confirm that they saw molten metal. Zero of those accounts prove it was molten iron.

    Thank you for yet another bit of evidence that the towers collapsed due to the damage caused by the impact and the resulting fire.
     
  23. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,055
    It is not going unnoticed that you're continuing to evade the issue.

    Explain using simple English what you think happened and offer evidence.
     

Share This Page