Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Evidence for alternative hypothesis:collapseBYexplosives

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Evidence for alternative hypothesis:collapseBYexplosives
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... , 16, 17, 18 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

cbclark4

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 12:59 am Post subject:

blaseblasphemener wrote:

ED209 wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

anything else you are curious about?

Only when your head will eventually collapse in on itself

No, Cinammon Bun, it is you and the rest of the "official-ists" who have had your heads served up on a platter by loose ends. He has taken your flimsy arguments, opinions, or in the case of cbc, quotes from Albert Einstein, to the cleaners.

Honestly, how can you keep denying what is so bloody obvious? What is especially sad is when he presents something that has no explanation, like Guiliani knowing the building was coming down, or the evaporated beams in WTC7, or the 6 years and counting on the NIST report on WTC7, or the Cheney timeline, or the Pentagon on standdown, etc. etc. and when this is presented, the official-ists just put up a quote from Albert Einstein. You pointedly ignore the questions that have no explanation, which just go to show your state of denial. Meanwhile, loose ends just keeps taking you to school.

(cue Albert Einstein quote from cbclark)

The first way to lie artistically is to tell the truth--but not all of it. The
second way involves telling the truth, too, but is harder: Tell the exact
truth and maybe all of it . . but tell it so unconvincingly that your listener
is sure you are lying.
Lazarus Long

I do know that the slickest way to lie is to tell the right amount of truth - then to shut up.
Jubal Harshaw

Basic truths cannot change and once a man of insight expresses one of them it is never necessary, no matter how much the world changes, to reformulate them.
Mr. DuBois

One man may find happiness in supporting a wife and children. And
another may find it in robbing banks. Still another may labor mightily for
years in pursuing pure research with no discernible results.
Jubal Harshaw

(Sorry Al was busy)

Last edited by cbclark4 on Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:06 am; edited 1 time in total

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:00 am Post subject:

What a real building implosion would look and sound like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khD2gZkkSu0

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:09 am Post subject:

huffdaddy wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

huffdaddy wrote:

blaseblasphemener wrote:

yes, everyone is lying. the true conspiracy that day was by the 118 first-responders, by-standers, soccer moms, and reporters.

Are all of the videos lying? Where are the audible explosions. Don't you find that the least bit curious?

you want to hear audible explosions? fine. i'll post them around 4ish after work.

Yes, please do.

How about this video. Are they close enough for you? Do you hear any explosives going off?

http://www.metacafe.com/fplayer/277852/9_11_wtc_explosion.swf

No explosions. No explosives. No controlled demolition. Controlled demolition theory doesn't get past square one.

yes. that is closer. now we can hear a loud (from a distance) roar. i will call upon the article that Joo posted. lemme show you.

Quote:

The right-hand picture above is often used to discredit the tape, and in principle it does a good job. Do these two look like the same person? No. However, as usual, it's not quite as simple as that.

lets use this logic. --->doesn't seem the same, but it isn't that simple.

can you grasp my flow? things aren't always simple.

Lets assume the towers are HUGE. so, as the 'official' has said, it would take a lot of explosives to take that building out and destroy everything and melt steel. I agree.

so when all those explosives were going off, there were no pauses between explosions. we would not hear individual explosions starting and stopping. it would sound like a loud roar.

but there should be explosions in the beginning, before it went down, just like real CD. and there are. that is what the witnesses report. initial explosions to take out heavy infastructure.

and those explosions are heard in video footage

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CcRs1fv8i3I

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7LPbXaZAKNI

http://youtube.com/watch?v=VhiEAn6RCFA (this one happens at 1 sec mark)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=MDSGm2jhdA0 (this one is long, but it is interesting, acoustic analysis of audio/video. buddy was across the water video tapes. he caught low freq traveling across the water. acoustic characteristics of explosives)

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 1:15 am Post subject:

cbclark4 wrote:

blaseblasphemener wrote:

ED209 wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

anything else you are curious about?

Only when your head will eventually collapse in on itself

these are your best yet.

these give very good insight.....perhaps there is something hiding behind these quotes.

thanks, i actually liked these ones

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 2:01 am Post subject:

loose_ends wrote:

yes. that is closer. now we can hear a loud (from a distance) roar.

A roar from a distance? He's standing right next to the damn building. Do you mean the roar the building makes as it's collapsing? That's too late for controlled demolition explosives.

Quote:

so when all those explosives were going off, there were no pauses between explosions. we would not hear individual explosions starting and stopping. it would sound like a loud roar.

Do you even read what you write? Do you think about it? Basically, you're saying that there were so many explosions they just turned into one giant roar. Problem is, we don't hear a roar until the building starts coming down.

Quote:

but there should be explosions in the beginning, before it went down, just like real CD. and there are. that is what the witnesses report. initial explosions to take out heavy infastructure.

"Witnesses report." Where's the video?

Quote:

and those explosions are heard in video footage

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CcRs1fv8i3I

Explosions after the towers collapsed.

Quote:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7LPbXaZAKNI

??? Looks like post-collapse as well.

Quote:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=VhiEAn6RCFA (this one happens at 1 sec mark)

"Hours after the attack, many small explosions rumbled through downtown." Dude, how dense can you be? I said pre-collapse explosions. What do post-collapse explosions prove? That the explosions people are quoted as hearing were unrelated to the collapse.

Quote:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=MDSGm2jhdA0 (this one is long, but it is interesting, acoustic analysis of audio/video. buddy was across the water video tapes. he caught low freq traveling across the water. acoustic characteristics of explosives)

You're wasting my time. Since when did anyone need "acoustic analysis" to hear a controlled demolition. It also contradicts your silly "giant roar" theory.

Just admit it. You can't find a video which has audible pre-collapse explosions on the upper floors. No explosions, no explosives, no controlled demolition. There's nothing else to discuss. It's just that simple.

cbclark4

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 2:10 am Post subject:

�Logic is the art of going wrong with confidence� Joseph Wood Krutch

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 2:42 am Post subject:

cbclark4 wrote:

�Logic is the art of going wrong with confidence�
Joseph Wood Krutch

ur on a roll. like that one too.

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 4:42 am Post subject:

Quote:

A roar from a distance? He's standing right next to the damn building. Do you mean the roar the building makes as it's collapsing? That's too late for controlled demolition explosives.

lets run over this logic of yours.

you claim he is standing right next to the building. The building is 110 stories high. yet, we can see the building from top to bottom in the film.

can you explain this? how can he be in 2 places at the same time?

if he were next to the building, we would only be able to see the walls due its size.

so can a person be in two places at once on 9/11? It isn't the first time some one has made the claim...hrggg..cheney.

Your reasoning is twisted bro.

And again, CD occured while the building was collapsing. each explosion insured the floor beneath was gone when the one above collapsed. thus, hundreds if not thousands of explosives going off in a row would be a huge roar.

The big single explosions sounds i showed you may have been the large explosions witnesses talked about before the collapse. These ones may have been responsible for taking out infrastructure. you heard the sounds on the video. evidence of explosives to support what witnesses said. they correlate, making the evidence stronger.

Quote:

you've totally misunderstood the CDT again. The roar is the explosions going off floor by floor so that the building collapses. remember, up and out explosions, but in the direction of top to bottom. The video i showed you were pre collapse initiation explosions. those occured before initiation collapse to get at the heart of the building...perhaps the core and foundation.

again, there is witness testimony to bombs. both pre collapse explosions and collapse explosions. When we look in the video, we find examples explosive events. it was reported on mainstream news at the time. why is it such a debate? bombs were reported by a lot of people.

Quote:

Explosions after the towers collapsed.

here's your twisted logic again.

you don't know that for sure. you should have said, "it could be after both collapses"

Quote:

??? Looks like post-collapse as well.

twisted logic again

Quote:

building 7 ....don't forget building 7

and the witnesses are reporting WTC towers pre collapse....nice try though

there's nothing you can do about the witness testimoney except deny it and pretend all those first responders are lying or mistaken. and again, explosions are captured on film.

so why do the first responders have such vivid memories, but the video evidence in limited? BECAUSE only first responders were close enough. most video was from a far. people were falling out buildings. molten steel was dripping from the building. explosions in the lobby. i'm sure there was a perimeter set up.

Quote:

people don't need it to hear with acoustic analysis. people that were there heard it and reported it. but that isnt good enough nowadays i guess.

it does not contradict anything. if you had looked at the video would see that the reading are coming before the collapse. the video is right beside the readings. you can see i assume.

the frequency supports the hypothesis. a few spread out big ones to hit infrastructre.

it is funny how you have reduced your arguement to this single point. even though i have given you both witness testimony and video evidence of explosions regardless of your ever soooooo important angle and time frame.

what you fail to see is that this is only one small part of the ever growing amount of evidence that exists.

so you can deny until you are blue on the face, it won't change a thing. the 'official' story is coming a part one stitch at a time.

witness testimony plus video evidence plus possible new acoustic evidence = suppport for CDT

you can't choose to be scientific when you want, confusing fact and opinion as you please.

the science out weighs the official story

your logic doesn't stand a chance

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 4:48 am Post subject:

again huff doody i challenge you to review a CDT report and I'll review an 'official' report. we'll send each other our ctiques and debate those specific points. you have proven you have the time. so be a man an accept it.

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:27 am Post subject:

loose_ends wrote:

Quote:

A roar from a distance? He's standing right next to the damn building. Do you mean the roar the building makes as it's collapsing? That's too late for controlled demolition explosives.

lets run over this logic of yours.

you claim he is standing right next to the building. The building is 110 stories high. yet, we can see the building from top to bottom in the film.

Okay wiseass, he's not "right next" to the building. He's in the plaza, less than a city block away. Close enough to hear any explosions.

Quote:

And again, CD occured while the building was collapsing. each explosion insured the floor beneath was gone when the one above collapsed. thus, hundreds if not thousands of explosives going off in a row would be a huge roar.

Watch any controlled demolition video. The explosions always precede the collapse but a noticeable delay. The explosions are violently loud. They are distinctly explosive. They are easily discernible. They are certainly not a "roar." There is no explosion before the WTC collapses begins. There are no explosions going off during the collapse.

Quote:

Explosions after the towers collapsed.

here's your twisted logic again.

you don't know that for sure. you should have said, "it could be after both collapses"

Dude. How stupid are you? The streets are filled with dust and debris. They're fireman making a personal call. Of course it's after the collapses. Well after the collapses.

Quote:

there's nothing you can do about the witness testimoney except deny it and pretend all those first responders are lying or mistaken. and again, explosions are captured on film.

Where's the video? Not a single video has auditory pre-collapse explosions coming from the upper floors. You should be able to hear the explosions in mid-town. You can't even hear them from the base of the towers.

Quote:

i challenge you to review a CDT report and I'll review an 'official' report.

we'll send each other our ctiques and debate those specific points.

you have proven you have the time.

No, I don't have the time. And there's no need to review any reports.

No explosions from the towers = No controlled demolition.

At this point, you are either a troll, delusional, or incredibly stupid. A combination of all three wouldn't surprise me.

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 6:43 am Post subject:

Quote:

your whole arguement rests on this. however CDT admits it sin't a normal CD. I've explained it to you twice already. I've seen the videos you posted. I realize they don't look simular. WTC7 looks similar.

So what? I admit, it doesnt look the same. No one has ever argued it looked the same. WTC7 is different. It looks the same. you want to take about that one? will you feel more comfortable? do you want videos of explosives for WTC7?

Quote:

Dude. How stupid are you? The streets are filled with dust and debris. They're fireman making a personal call. Of course it's after the collapses. Well after the collapses.

there were two collapses. time inbetween. so, that is what i was refering to. i saw the soot. think of possibilites before you react so quickly.

Quote:

again, witness evidence exists. certain tapes conferm. once the building starts collapsing the explosions and squibs are obvious. so no, nothing rests on ur demand for this video you want. sorry to burst your bubble. next.

Quote:

fight or flight?...ah, he's a flight

there is a lot of need to review all reports.

you didn't prove there werent explosives. you proved that the video you demanded does not exist, or i havent found one.

Quote:

At this point, you are either a troll, delusional, or incredibly stupid. A combination of all three wouldn't surprise me

i'm a dude with a lot questions about the current american government and how people feel about 9/11. you are helping me answer those questions. thanks a bunch.

i'm sure you are neither of the above mentioned in your post. and i bet beyong the blindness that the 9/11 myth has caused, you are normal, just like everyone else.

CB..got anything to add?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:03 am Post subject:

http://www.debunking911.com/quotes.htm http://www.debunking911.com/explosions.htm

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 3:01 pm Post subject:

loose_ends wrote:

Quote:

your whole arguement rests on this. however CDT admits it sin't a normal CD. I've explained it to you twice already. I've seen the videos you posted. I realize they don't look simular.

It's not even the look I'm pointing out. It's the sound. There's a complete absence of any explosives. A controlled demolition without any explosives.

The holes in the CDT are too deep to explore. But why bother when the obvious lack of explosives rests the case.

Quote:

once the building starts collapsing the explosions and squibs are obvious. so no, nothing rests on ur demand for this video you want.

Do you actually believe the lies you tell? There are no explosions before or during the collapse. The "squibs" only exist on a few floors (why not every floor with explosives?) and are totally different than demolition squibs.

No explosions = no explosives = no controlled demolition

cbclark4

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 3:12 pm Post subject:

I don't pretend to have all the answers. But the questions are certainly worth thinking about. Arthur C. Clarke

cbclark4

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan

Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 3:22 pm Post subject:

We can only reason from what is; we can reason on actualities, but not on possibilities. Thomas Paine

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... , 16, 17, 18 Next
Page 17 of 18

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe