Test your fragile, feeble minds...

Discussion in '9/11' started by creativedreams, Dec 4, 2011.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So it was all 'dustified', only it wasn't, and then no one was allowed near it, even though thousands of people were all over the pile for months.

    Riiiiiiight.
     
  2. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113

    this is not about what you can invent from what I said and as usual out of context.

    If you want to talk about that go to the appropriate thread so people can see what I said in context
     
  3. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just quoting you. Pointing out the obvious contradictions.
    If you wish to rebut, go ahead.
     
  4. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113

    paraphrasing is not quoting, I explained how I meant the post here if that is not good enough too bad.
     
  5. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nice try, but I quoted you directly. Changing your mind after you're caught fabricating won't help.

    Now, can you support your claim, or will you continue to dodge the subject?

    (I predict option 2)
     
  6. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    do you have any idea how lame what you are doing is? If the best you can do against me is make hay on a grammatical deficiency that I corrected no less really shows how insignificant and valueless your whole position is.

    This is funny

    My corrected grammatical deficiency is not the topic here and I am sure the OP would appreciate it if you would not destroy their thread with this crap
     
  7. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not discussing your grammar. I'm pointing out your blatant contradictions.

    Your newest tactic is 'indignation'.

    I'm happy to discuss the OP. Can you do so without fabricating or contradicting yourself?
     
  8. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's the best you can do?

    :bored:
     
  9. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Only when in enclosed within with the aircraft structure.

    The geniuses here are talking about jet fuel exploding like a typical high explosive.

    I am talking about ground zero NOT being tested for explosives.
     
  10. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That concurs with the dry labbers having a pre concieved conclusion to build their BS science upon
     
  11. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Most of those kamikaze planes had bombs on them...d******!
     
  12. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You're putting words in my mouth,scooter...I never said the fuel exploded like 'typical high explosives',but it was enough
     
  13. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And the ships they hit were heavily armored..........unlike the WTC towers,dumbass
     
  14. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not even close, but you seem to need everything spoon fed to you. Typical 'truther'.
     
  15. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    OK

    They still had bombs and would have caused major damage WITHOUT the gasoline aboard the planes...d******!
     
  16. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nah...you too s**** to realize the change
     
  17. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Enough to do what...burn?

    The jet fuel being ignited did not explode with enough energy to damage the structure in the way high explosives would.


    It sure must be nice to live in Lala land...or is it Fantasy Island
     
  18. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The planes were full of fuel (not gasoline, btw) and caused major damage when they hit. The fuel itself caused damage. The resulting ignition of the aerosolized fuel caused even further damage.
     
  19. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It didn't need to do the same amount, or the kind of damage high explosives would. The damage it caused (immediate and long term) was enough to imperil the building.
     
  20. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No...The Kamikazes PLANES were full of gasoline, the JETS were partially full of jet fuel.
     
  21. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And how did you come to this conclusion?
     
  22. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Seeing the final result. Reading reports from NIST, Purdue University, MIT and several other international engineering groups.
     
  23. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What did they say about explosives?
     
  24. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Go forth yourself and read the reports. Here's a great place to start:

    Link

    This article, and the accompanying videos, show that NIST did indeed test explosives and demolition theories. Despite what you read on 'truther' websites, they were very thorough.
     
  25. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The official 9/11 reports are just that, "theories"

    Reading them is pretty much as others have described them, as pre concieved conclusions.

    It wasn't an investigation, it was a project.
     

Share This Page