Japan Skyscrapers Sway With 8.9 Earthquake but the WTC collapsed !! still beleive the 9/11 version?

reply to post by Ben81


Tell you what. Choose a bar you do not frequent. Sit at said bar. Anyone who sits down, ask them if they believe that 9/11 was a false flag. or better yet, head down to the local VFW and tell anyone in there who believes the OS that they are unpatriotic...or maybe a major league baseball stadium and conduct a poll. You will get plenty of responses.

I bet you that not 10% of the people agree with you. I guarantee it. More than likely, you may get your ass handed to you by a vet or someone else who is patriotic.

It is one thing to think there is more to a story and it is another to label anyone who does not agree with you. That is called ignorance.

Originally posted by esdad71
Tell you what. Choose a bar you do not frequent. Sit at said bar. Anyone who sits down, ask them if they believe that 9/11 was a false flag.

You know, there are better ways to do this than by going to the local bar and conversing with drunks.

You know, like scientific surveys? Like Zogby?

A few of those have already been done, but I imagine you just didn't like the results, so you'd rather tell people go to a bar and make baseless insinuations about what they would or wouldn't hear from others.

reply to post by LifeInDeath

My best friend was a first responder on 9/11 and worked the pile for five straight days after, as well. He worked in the shadow of Building 7 before it came down and was about 6 or 8 blocks away when it did come down. He knows one person who had been inside Building 7 and was only a block or so away when it came down (she almost died). The place was a mess, despite what you want to believe. It was very damaged on the side facing the WTC and the whole day they were worried it was going to collapsed. But whatever, you won't believe me so I'm not sure why I'm bothering, nobody ever does. The people I know and have met who were on site, at the scene on the day all believe it came down on its own. Not one of them heard any bombs going off. I'll be believe them before anyone else because nobody was closer to the situation.

When you give us a reason to believe you have not been sent here to purposely cast doubt on the most damning evidence suggesting a government connection with 9/11, then you'll understand if we don't take your statements at face value.

reply to post by esdad71

Anyone who sits down, ask them if they believe that 9/11 was a false flag. or better yet, head down to the local VFW and tell anyone in there who believes the OS that they are unpatriotic...or maybe a major league baseball stadium and conduct a poll. You will get plenty of responses.

Yes, sure, where else would you find a more open-minded group of critical thinkers who are well-versed in current events than your local bar? And, yes, who else would be the most likely to agree that 9/11 was a false flag event involving our government than people currently serving or retired from the military? Better yet go down to the Veteran's Office, yes! There will be tons of people there who are unbiased and unlikely to maintain loyalty to a government's official story. Of all the people to ask, surely they would be the most open to accept the idea.

Any other suggestions that might not be so laughable?

I gave 3 references. One where people hang out (not everyone at a bar is a drunk), a VFW( OK, that was sarcastic) but why not a baseball game? A very good cross section.

Zogby is good but how about Scripps Howard polls?

Esdad is more interested in popular opinion than the truth.

As long as the majority still believe the OS he is doing his job.

I think we all know popular opinion is most often wrong.

Originally posted by esdad71
Zogby is good but how about Scripps Howard polls?

Any of them readily give data and avoid the asinine suggestion that we tally data by going to places where only "certain people" generally hang out. At least Zogby's survey samples were randomized.

reply to post by ANOK


Yes, and I get my check. 4 cents for every post and 5 cents for every star....DHS pays well these days....

I have a good question here ..
why did the 2 WTC tower fall down after being hit by a plane
but the pentagon wasnt damage that much after being hit by a similar plan

this is the comparison everyone needed

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by ANOK

 

Yes, and I get my check. 4 cents for every post and 5 cents for every star....DHS pays well these days....

You're doing your job whether you get paid or not.

If you don't get paid then yer a sucker lol.

All this time you spend defending the government, for what esdad? What do you think you're accomplishing? If you really believe what we're saying is complete nonsense and no one will ever take us seriously then why do you feel the need to continually defend the OS? You do realise that if you OS supporters stopped posting then the discussion would probably end?

I just don't get you resident OS supporters continually trying to discredit any and all evidence against the OS.
It shows you must have some fear, or you know, that we are right, and you don't want other people to realise we're right. I just don't see any other point of constantly defending something against what you believe has no merit.

Originally posted by esdad71

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

Originally posted by esdad71
reply to post by psikeyhackr

 

Deal with what? Simply asking, since you disagree with the common version of the story, what you think happened that day. Why can none of you do this.

Why can't you build a physical model that can completely collapse?

It is not my fault that you think rhetorical bullsh# is more important than physics.

You presume that you can use words to recreate your delusions in other people's minds.

Physics is incapable of caring about words or delusions.

www.youtube.com...

Just ask the NASA scientist Ryan Mackey.

psik

Because today we have computers that can do it for you. Of course, there is still wind tunnel testing and I have already talked about that. However, physics can be recreated with a home pc now so your washers are nice but again not applicable.


You preach physics but state that they were not present on 9/11 based on the information that the NIST report does not include. So what. You can find it in other places but you will not allow yourself to believe that.

Again, I ask, without mentioning concrete, how the collapse occurred. No rhetoric here psik just a question.

I am not trying to explain what did it. The point is that ACCURATE DATA on the buildings should show why airliners shouldn't be able to destroy any skyscrapers that big that fast.

But computers can be programmed to LIE if most people can't figure it out.

How is it that the NIST has empirical data that the south tower deflected 15 inches on impact and yet the Purdue simulation which they claim is "scientific" has core columns that do not move in the simulated impact.

But computer simulations require correct data, otherwise Garbage In, Garbage Out.

So why can't the NIST tell us the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on every level of the towers?

In fact why haven't physicists and structural engineers been demanding that information for NINE YEARS?

That is what makes this entire incident HYSTERICALLY FUNNY. The nation that put men on the Moon can't tell the entire world the distributions of steel and concrete of skyscrapers designed before 1969. Most people are supposed to believe idiotic crap because the authority of the United States says so. The Laws of Physics are incapable of giving a sh# about the United States. American politicians and many more around the world have simply proven their stupidity by behaving as though they believe this crap.

psik

reply to post by ANOK


I am not defending the government, I am simply making sure that people look at both sides and are no indoctrinated into the Truther movement. Years ago, when this happened, I read all the sites that stated it was the government. I started to believe it. I will give the guys at Loose Change credit for the movie but it was propaganda. It all is. If the government is powerful enough to pull off 9/11, do you think they would not create the opposition also?

Maybe I understand them a little better than you and please take off the blinders. We can argue all day and in the end, real world physics allowed the towers to fall. It happened. We are not theorizing about what could occur without a test. Now, if you want people to not look at something, what do you do? You create a diversion or distraction.

No one has as much vigor for Flight 93 as they do for the Pentagon or the WTC. Because there is something there and the government does not want a closer look. However, where they know there is no evidence of anything to be found, they point the ones who are looking for an answer...like a lemming.

I am simply here to help deny ignorance and make sure ALL the evidence is reviewed and not spoon fed by anti government websites. 10 years later and they have not gotten enough money for an independent investigation? I continually read on there there are thousands and thousands of people.

So, if they all gave 5 dollars a month, for 100,000 people, you should have 60 million dollars. More than was spent on the Original 9/11 commission...but no, it is not because it is bs.

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

In fact why haven't physicists and structural engineers been demanding that information for NINE YEARS?


psik

Simple most physicists and structural engineers DONT see what you think you see thats why!! it's NOT ROCKET SCIENCE.!!!!

Originally posted by ANOK

All this time you spend defending the government, for what esdad? What do you think you're accomplishing? If you really believe what we're saying is complete nonsense and no one will ever take us seriously then why do you feel the need to continually defend the OS? You do realise that if you OS supporters stopped posting then the discussion would probably end?

I just don't get you resident OS supporters continually trying to discredit any and all evidence against the OS.
It shows you must have some fear, or you know, that we are right, and you don't want other people to realise we're right. I just don't see any other point of constantly defending something against what you believe has no merit.

Pot and Kettle why do you spend so much time doing what you do! we are trying to educate I am not from the USA and dont care a jot about the government, we are defending SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING not the government.

Its like the Apollo hoax threads to this day we still get "WHY NO STARS" quotes when people dont UNDESTAND why that happens and its entirely down to photgraphic exposure you have to educate them!
SAME with this!

No one has all the data on this NO ONE but

Did the planes impact YES
Did they cause damage YES
Could the fuel explosion cause damage YES
Could the fire have caused problems YES

So could what we saw happen, actually happen YES!

It really is that SIMPLE!

How so familiar again !!
the fall looks damn close to how technically the WTC fall to the ground

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Did the planes impact YES
Did they cause damage YES
Could the fuel explosion cause damage YES
Could the fire have caused problems YES

So could what we saw happen, actually happen YES!

It really is that SIMPLE!

I disagree. You may be that simple, but some of us see a huge problem with the claims of the official story, and your opinions.

No, I don't think what we saw could have happened, period. There is no proof the planes caused enough damage to cause complete failure. There is no evidence any steel got hot enough to fail, due to the fires, let alone cause complete failure of the whole building. It was nothing but shock and awe to impress the simple minded.

Funny after all this time having this explained to you, you still fail to understand. The OS contains no proof of anything, and neither does your opinion. The NIST report was a hypotheses, not facts, not even a testable theory.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Did the planes impact YES
Did they cause damage YES
Could the fuel explosion cause damage YES
Could the fire have caused problems YES

So could what we saw happen, actually happen YES!

It really is that SIMPLE!

I disagree. You may be that simple, but some of us see a huge problem with the claims of the official story, and your opinions.

No, I don't think what we saw could have happened, period. There is no proof the planes caused enough damage to cause complete failure. There is no evidence any steel got hot enough to fail, due to the fires, let alone cause complete failure of the whole building. It was nothing but shock and awe to impress the simple minded.

Funny after all this time having this explained to you, you still fail to understand. The OS contains no proof of anything, and neither does your opinion. The NIST report was a hypotheses, not facts, not even a testable theory.

Thats the problem with everyone today
they trust to much their eyes ..what they saw
adding the "official" version .. it become unquestionable to them
those people are so trap in their mind ..
or know the truth but will continu to lie to the people so
the story wont change in the history of mankind and the warmongering side would win

reply to post by ANOK


A reply to a post from 24-6-2011 nice to see you are on the ball as ever ANOK

reply to post by Ben81


??

the fall looks damn close to how technically the WTC fall to the ground

Huh?

It's not even closely similar (except for the major dust clouds).

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by ANOK

 

A reply to a post from 24-6-2011 nice to see you are on the ball as ever ANOK

Dearest wmd,

Well you can't say I never reply to posts. I would have replied sooner buddy, but unfortunately for you a room in my apartment block was recently painted, a nice shade of blue, unfortunately for me it eventually dried, so I'm back here making stupid replies to stupid replies.

Your buddy ANOK

P.S. I hope you get to read this before it's deleted.
P.P.S. Luv n kisses...