9/11 The New Pearl Harbour

Discussion in '9/11' started by Cornergas, Sep 10, 2017.

  1. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So how did the floors outside the core get destroyed first without the the horizontal beams of the falling top portion encountering the horizontal beams in the core? We can all see the videos. It is the explanation of what we see that is inadequate.

    Of course YOU can just Believe!

    We don't even have data on how the thickness of the horizontal beams varied down the building.

    psik
     
  2. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    92,028
    Likes Received:
    23,303
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Irrelevant, once the top started moving nothing could resist the force.
     
  3. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,390
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No?



    The above building doesn't believe your claim.



    Neither does that one.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2017
  4. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Right, just BELIEVE and physics is irrelevant.

    Supposedly we can simulate the climate 100 years into the future and can't do a 30 years old skyscraper. :cynic:

    The 9/11 Religion.

    psik
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2017
  5. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    92,028
    Likes Received:
    23,303
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nothing like apples to oranges comparison and just solidified the fact ignorance of physics and structure.
     
  6. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    92,028
    Likes Received:
    23,303
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would say that those that do not understand physics are most prone to conspiracy theories.
     
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,390
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just solidified the fact that you are full of it and you're only parroting what you've been fed by propagandists. In both cases your blanket claim "once the top started moving nothing could resist the force" was completely contradicted by the FACTS (which includes physics BTW). As for your other claim "The kinetic energy produced by 44,000t falling is much greater than even the core could stand", it is also contradicted by the fact that there is no evidence that 44,000t "fell" on the remaining structure and caused it to be fully destroyed in its entirety in an unimpeded uniform (including the majority of the core) accelerating fashion at approximately 2/3 G. No one has ever proven such a claim, even NIST made sure to avoid proving it. However, the burden of proof rests on the claimant, feel free to do so as opposed to insulting those who don't buy your unsubstantiated claims contradicted by reality.
     
  8. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    92,028
    Likes Received:
    23,303
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL, the top part just floated away.
     
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,390
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's your proof? Thanks, you clearly show you have no clue.

     
  10. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,083
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Yeah, the official story is a conspiracy theory.

    Analyzing what actually happens when one mass impacts another mass requires data. What is the mass of each? What is the velocity of each? What is the COMPOSITION of each? I do not know how the thickness of the horizontal beams in the core changed down the building. I have never seen or heard and "expert" raise the question. So the real problem with 9/11 is all of the people claiming to know physics and saying nothing about the necessary data that is missing.

    So all of the people who "believe" anything without the data necessary data to do a scientific analysis are idiots. Talking about proof after SIXTEEN years is hilarious nonsense. For all practical purposes the engineering schools are accessories after the fact regardless of who did what.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2017
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,390
    Likes Received:
    1,199
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So are all the people who bought the official conspiracy theory on faith. And to be sure, that is all they have to rely on since NIST was the official body tasked with the scientific analysis and they were scientifically proven to be a massive fraud. Not to mention they deliberately withheld the necessary data under pretext of endangering public safety.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017

Share This Page