Warrior General Games

You are a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist. You've been proven wrong time and again. Does it really take 70 pages?

DOH! make that 71

Originally posted by AFG_vet

You are a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist. You've been proven wrong time and again. Does it really take 70 pages?

DOH! make that 71



Willful Ignorance.

Originally posted by AFG_vet

You are a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist. You've been proven wrong time and again. Does it really take 70 pages?

DOH! make that 71



No... I have had people make false statements time and again. You have not bothered to read the official reports. Not FEMA, not NIST, not the 9/11 commission, nothing! Until you start actually using REAL science, you will always spew incorrect facts. Things that none of those sources claims to be true. What was proven wrong? I have addressed every single claim made in this thread. I have either disproven each, or shown that it cannot be proven. I don't make false assumptions or false assertions. I have tried to educate you on thermodynamics, to show you that the fire could not have done anything more than make the steel a little warm. I have tried to get you to understand the way that fire behaves. I have shown the diagrams of the elevator layout, proving that it was not jet fuel that caused lobby explosions. I have shown that not any person associated with the official story claims that debris had anything to do with WTC 7 collapse.

I hope some of you understand this... I believed the official story, for years! Then I read the official story. Something none of you have done. It is wrong in so many ways, but I never noticed until I read it. I trusted the media, and the propaganda that I was fed. I do not go to infowars or sites like it. I go to scientific sites. If you had the guts to go to some of them, maybe you would open your mind a little... but all of you have displayed a complete lack of the education you claim to have. It truly is willful ignorance. You refuse to even read the official story, so you can continue living your fantasy... that the world is what you think it is. You are intellectual cowards at best.

Originally posted by Gnosis
Willful Ignorance.


unintentional irony.

Originally posted by wormser1971
The amount of fuel can be proven. There are no failed assumptions or math/science mistakes. The collapse is riddled with failure! Whether intentional or not, they are wrong in some aspects. Those aspects happen to be the most important parts of the claim that the buildings collapsed without assistance.

It doesn't matter if the planes were piloted by jihadists, remote control or wiley coyote! The collapse scenarios are not possible!

The collapse has been shown through AutoCad models to have been possible so I am not quite sure what you are talking about.
Up to 55" of bowing and displacement occurred on the outer perimeter supports before the collapse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7b6_1378926526

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f19_1328368615

Firefighters knew the WTC 7 was going to collapse because of damage and uncontrolled fires. That is why they pulled out completely 3 hours before the collapse. I am sure you will claim that the NYFD was also involved in a conspiracy though.

Originally posted by seths99
unintentional irony.

/yawn

Originally posted by baumusc
The collapse has been shown through AutoCad models to have been possible so I am not quite sure what you are talking about.
Up to 55" of bowing and displacement occurred on the outer perimeter supports before the collapse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7b6_1378926526

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f19_1328368615

Firefighters knew the WTC 7 was going to collapse because of damage and uncontrolled fires. That is why they pulled out completely 3 hours before the collapse. I am sure you will claim that the NYFD was also involved in a conspiracy though.

In your first video... at :57 they start spewing the same bad assumptions made by NIST. You cannot prove that the fireproofing was blown off, or that that number of columns was damaged to that severity. The fireproofing was not foam. I showed you the data on the fireproofing. And I never claimed anything about melting... so the video does nothing but pump you up inside.

Here is the OP comment from the second video... I am telling you, you don't look at this shit!
Originally posted by video

PLEASE NOTE: This video was made in September 2007. The official investigation into the collapse of WTC7 at this time was still ongoing and did its final report was not released until more than a year later, in December 2008. Therefore, everything in this video was based on their working hypotheses at the time, and it should come as no surprise that when the investigation concluded, some of their findings varied from their early hypotheses (as in any investigation). Namely, the claim in this video that the fires were "likely fed by a series of diesel generators" turned out not to be the case, and the hypothesis that the collapse started with Truss 1 was also incorrect. The collapse actually started in the same vicinity only a few floors up, with the collapse of Column 79. However, neither of these two greatly alter the overall conclusions for the mechanism of the collapse. I would go in and make these changes in the video itself, but all the video's data was on an old computer that I got rid of literally years ago.

Yes... that stuff makes a difference!


Third video... They are saying that fire alone collapsed the building... again! One column got hot and the whole thing came down... nice try!

fourth video... Now you have a guy saying it was debris plus fire? WTF? Which one is it... and remember... NIST found that the damage was of no concern. That teir 1 crap at 1:50... pure B.S. There is no evidence or support for this video... even from NIST

So... Now baum is using worse than infowars for his sources... but if I use AE911truth... I get slammed for it?

The professional debunkers use four primary tactics to accomplish their propaganda feats:

1) They refuse to mention, much less attempt to disprove, the most irrefutable and damaging evidence.

2) They take great delight in debunking only those conspiracy theories that are the weakest or that are planted by other government sympathizers to help discredit the more credible conspiracy facts. This is what is referred to as a "straw man" argument, where a weak or false argument is set up so that it can easily be knocked down.

3) They only select "experts" who agree with the official conclusion.

4) They snicker at or mock anyone who believes that government engages in criminal behavior or covers up crimes in collusion with judges, investigators, prosecutors, media heads, and hand-picked commissions. Worse, they label dissenters as unpatriotic or mentally imbalanced.

Here... you watch this one... coward

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjkEDb-100U

I'm not sure what pictures you were looking at but it is pretty obvious that all three WTC buildings were brought down from damage to the structure combined with uncontrolled burning fires. But yes, once again ignore structural engineers and go with your own made up conclusions. Ignore the fact that firefighters were reporting that the WTC 7 was starting to show signs of collapse 3 hours before it came down. Ignore the fact that there was bowing in the outer trusses of WTC 1 and 2 of over 50" before the collapse occurred. Ignore the eyewitness testimony from people in the WTC buildings when they were hit and their reports of what the fireballs from the jet fuel did. Ignore demolition experts who found that the collapses didn't show any similarities to an actual demolition. Ignore the fact that the conspiracy you are toting would require a massive number of people working in unison to pull off. Ignore the fact that there were over 100 eyewitnesses at the Pentagon that saw the passenger jet hit it. Ignore the fact that they found tons of debris from the passenger jets at all the sites. Ignore, ignore, ignore.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html

AE911Truth.info
http://ae911truth.info/wordpress/

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%20STUDY%208-06%20w%20clarif%20as%20of%209-8-06%20.pdf

so did wormser and gnosis ever stop trolling?

Originally posted by mat5592
so did wormser and gnosis ever stop trolling?

I dunno, but I think we've come full circle twice now.

Originally posted by taurran
I suppose you always believe everything on the news without asking questions?

Why not? You always believe everything on youtube.

Originally posted by Sooner_Nation
Why not? You always believe everything on youtube.

You mean videos that literally show cops pulling guns and beating on people? Really?

CIA 9-11 whistleblower http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQjTYmDKPaI Came forward this year. She gives information about what the government knew before the attack. In april 2001 she had information that the WTC would be attacked... planes would be hijacked.

That should satisfy the "someone would have spoke" dialogue.