| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:34 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| jinju wrote: |
| Didnt a HUGE jetliner crash into each of these buildings and explode? |
yes |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| Didnt a HUGE jetliner crash into each of these buildings and explode? |
yes |
There is your explosion then, you fruitcake. 2 huge plans weighing hundreds of tons each, travelling at hundeds of kms per hour, full of explosive fuel hit 2 buildings not designed to take such collisions. The buildings collapsed. No need for a "controlled explosion" by anyone else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| be aware of over simplified cause and effect schemes...do your own research if you are at all curious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| Didnt a HUGE jetliner crash into each of these buildings and explode? |
yes |
There is your explosion then, you fruitcake. 2 huge plans weighing hundreds of tons each, travelling at hundeds of kms per hour, full of explosive fuel hit 2 buildings not designed to take such collisions. The buildings collapsed. No need for a "controlled explosion" by anyone else. |
can you support this claim? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| loose_ends wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| Didnt a HUGE jetliner crash into each of these buildings and explode? |
yes |
There is your explosion then, you fruitcake. 2 huge plans weighing hundreds of tons each, travelling at hundeds of kms per hour, full of explosive fuel hit 2 buildings not designed to take such collisions. The buildings collapsed. No need for a "controlled explosion" by anyone else. |
can you support this claim? |
Your obvious error was assuming that I was interested in a debate with a fruitcake such as yourself. Im not. You are crazy. A waste of my time. I have no use or time for stories about Big Foot, aliens landing in Roswell, or 9-11 conspiracy dellusions. Nice talking to ya, fruity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^if you don't want to be involved in a conversation, don't enter it.
there are plenty of other ways to attract attention to yourself....i'm sorry you are lonely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
^if you don't want to be involved in a conversation, don't enter it.
there are plenty of other ways to attract attention to yourself....i'm sorry you are lonely. |
With all those voices in your head, Im sure you never are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| Didnt a HUGE jetliner crash into each of these buildings and explode? |
no you fruitcake. WTC 7 didn't.
are you on your rag today jinju? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^ hey bud, I appreciate your support...but please don't turn this into a name calling session. You are better than that.
Lets act like adults. Why is it so hard? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^the evidence in my post supports the alternative hypothesis for the towers, not WT7. There is a lot of evidence for WT7, but lets discuss one thing at a time.
Hypothesis and evidence...the scientific method...stick to it |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bumpin while i wait for mindmeoo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loose_ends wrote: |
| bumpin while i wait for mindmeoo |
1. Extremely rapid onset of �collapse�
Says who? And so what? The plane damage and fire couldn't have done this?
2. Sounds of explosions at plane impact zone � a full second prior to collapse (heard by 118 first responders as well as by media reporters)
So what? Things snapping don't sound like explosions?
3. Observations of flashes (seen by numerous professionals)
So? Fire wouldn't cause some things to spark up? Electrical fires?
4. Squibs, or �mistimed� explosions, 40 floors below the �collapsing� building seen in all the videos
Says who?
5. Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people � mostly to dust
How is this inconsistent with a building collapsing?
6. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
How is this inconsistent with a building collapsing?
7. Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves
What is that?
8. Symmetrical collapse � through the path of greatest resistance � at nearly free-fall speed � the columns gave no resistance
How is this inconsistent with a building collapsing?
9. 1,400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris � outside of building footprint
How is this inconsistent with a building collapsing?
10. Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away
Two 110 story buildings release all their potential energy. Where is that energy going? Over pressure?
11. Lateral ejection of thousands of individual 20 - 50 ton steel beams up to 500 feet
How is this inconsistent with a building collapsing?
12. Total destruction of the building down to individual structural steel elements � obliterating the steel core structure.
How is this inconsistent with a building collapsing?
13. Tons of molten Metal found by FDNY under all 3 high-rises (no other possible source other than an incendiary cutting charge such as Thermate)
Says who? Molten metal or molten steel? What metal?
14. Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/stevene.jones'thermitethermateclaims
| Quote: |
Jones claims to have found traces of thermate (thermite with a small amount of sulfur and a large amount of barium nitrate added) on a piece of steel from the WTC. This claim is unsubstantiated. First, Jones does not cite the chemical composition of actual spent thermate signatures, for comparison. Second, Jones has not provided a chain of custody for the steel he tested that would preclude its contamination by other sources. Third, and most importantly, there is nothing unexpected about finding sulfur and trace metals on WTC steel and dust samples. |
15. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
So?
16. More than 1000 Bodies are unaccounted for � 700 tiny bone fragments found on top of nearby buildings�
So? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^one source?
i thought you were a fan of the scientific method?
Do you not believe in the official hypothesis?...can you not find evidence to support the official hypothesis? is your opinion alone enough?
hypothesis: The moon is not a star.
Says who?...it is bright...it sends light to earth...it could be a star.
is this justified reason and critical thought?
I'm disappointed MM2. But your comments have not let me down completely.
I will respond to each one soon enough....get some evidence if you have the time.
ps. as of october 17/2007 196 architects and engineers support Richard Gage's demolition hypothesis...still growing everyday. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wow 196 architects and engineers support this conclusion. Out of how many THOUSANDS of architects and engineers? And ofcourse lets not forget that an engineer doesnt equal another engineer. So a few idiot quacks believe this tripe. So what? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Was a grassy knoll involved in any of this otherwise I got to lay a brown cable? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
