911 contradictions

The RODOH Lounge is a place for general discussion, preferably non-Holocaust. The Lounge is only lightly moderated but please keep this a friendly place to chat with and get to know your fellow board participants.
User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 2675
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by blake121666 » Sat Oct 27, 2018 3:08 am

Werd wrote:
Sat Oct 27, 2018 3:05 am
Your video didn't say anything about that. 10.5 seconds is 24% greater than 8.5 seconds. But it was closer to 11 seconds - which is 30% greater than 8.5 seconds.
This comes from the documentary by George Humphreys in 9/11 The Great Illusion. You can also find similar figures here as quoted from NIST own report.



Maybe that math genius can also address this issue raised by been-there which is also in this video above.
I'm not interested in guessing arguments you can't make on your own. I'm going to have to pass on spoon-feeding you what you should be spoon-feeding me, Werd.

You do this sort of thing all of the time. Present any argument yourself. I'm not in the least bit interested in trying to discover what argument you are even presenting.

2 minute video, then a 13 minute video, then a freaking whole book. You do this crap all the time.

EDIT: There was a moment on the structure (weight supported at a distance from the support - or a lever if you will). Part snapped causing a temporary shift which "righted" when the whole support gave. Nothing particularly suspicious about that.

Werd
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by Werd » Sat Oct 27, 2018 3:18 am

Fine.

Image

Image

I have to take a few minutes to read an article you post, but you can't take a few minutes to watch a video. In other words, I have to take time for your sources, and you don't have to take time for mine. Interesting. By the way, I hope you realize I wasn't telling you to track down and watch George Humphrey's video either. I was merely telling you where I got the figures from. Now I have a quote from the NIST itself. Happy?

Re: the south tower upper part snapping and going OFF CENTER. In other words causing ASYMMETRICAL PRESSURE TO DOWN BELOW!
There was a moment on the structure (weight supported at a distance from the support - or a lever if you will). Part snapped causing a temporary shift which "righted" when the whole support gave. Nothing particularly suspicious about that.
How the hell did the rest of the building, all square meters of the floors collapse and buckle perfectly symmetrically if the upper part of the building that snapped was off the center of gravity? That seems odd. That is been-there's whole point and the point of the engineers he quoted. It should have just fallen off to the side. Or at the very least, left PART of the column below standing. You know, the square meters that were NOT under pressure from the above split part due to the above split part being off the center of gravity.

But as the 16 minute, I guess 18 minute video from Xendrius shows, charges could have easily been wired in the upper floors too to help demolish it as well.

montgomery2
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by montgomery2 » Sat Oct 27, 2018 2:32 pm

permanent_denial wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:05 pm
Werd wrote:
Sat Sep 16, 2017 2:01 pm
Considering mathis' stupid "it's mostly just air" argument, it is time to repost this video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAJrFKxyriQ
I have doubts about the legitimacy of the "official" 9/11 commission's investigation, but honestly this video kinda just makes skeptics look like idiots. A building like either of the WTC towers is not the same thing as a solid brick of material like the guy in this video demonstrates, and there is zero reason to expect that it would act exactly like a solid brick of material. Essentially, it's more like a bunch of toothpicks all experiencing stress and strain and otherwise hollow throughout (at least in terms of structural integrity). Specifically, the cement does not provide "extra" structural integrity, as many truthers tend to insinuate. Cement is very brittle and would actually be relatively easy to crumble with the downward force implied by the failure of the upper stories. You need to focus on the steel structure. Prove the redundancies built into the structure of the WTC would certainly have prevented global collapse in the event of a local failure, then we'll talk.

I tend to think most of this Infowars-tier pseudo-physics building collapse stuff is disinformation to keep people asking the wrong questions. Follow the money if you want the truth about 9/11.
Gotta love the video!!

Besides some people being batshit crazy conspiracists, there's another very valid reason for this kind of crap to be promoted. If anybody can't imagine what that is, I won't keep you guessing. It's about the money that can be made on books and films, promoting alternative theories from the government's factually true story. This video may or may not be one of them, but it's not worth my time to find out. It's just bullshit regardless of it's purpose.

A question that has come to mind from seeing all the photos again: Why is it that the supposed charges were placed exactly in the same places as the aircraft hit the towers? Did those that flew the aircraft have been informed on where the charges were placed?

That's a question for Werd and his co-conspiracy nuts. But be careful Werd, I'm setting a trap for you!

montgomery2
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by montgomery2 » Sat Oct 27, 2018 2:48 pm

I found this video on the collapse of building 7. This issue of the time taken by building 7 to come down is troubling evidence by the conspiracy side for which I can't supply a suitable explanation.

https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/fre ... celeration

The best I can do is make an uneducated guess but I don't know if it can be accepted as satidfactory? So for Werd: The video appears to show the impossible according to all the experts because building 7 does indeed fall in the amount of time they specify. ??

So my only possible explanation is that some unknown supernatural entity actually tampered with 'time'. That entity caused the building to appear to fall in 7 seconds, while in truth, time on earth was being manipulated and tampered with.

I think that may be an explanation that could be found acceptable to Werd? And if not then perhaps Werd has his own?

Seriously Werd! No really Werd, seriously?

montgomery2
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by montgomery2 » Sat Oct 27, 2018 2:51 pm

And I should also offer that this theory is consistent with the video that shows building 7 coming down BEFORE it actually came down. The manipulation of time by extraterrestials, martians, spooks, whatever, is something that needs to be considered much more carefully Werd!

Werd
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by Werd » Sat Oct 27, 2018 6:24 pm

Besides some people being batshit crazy conspiracists, there's another very valid reason for this kind of crap to be promoted.
Ad hominem fallacy.
Why is it that the supposed charges were placed exactly in the same places as the aircraft hit the towers?
Wrong. The explosive devices were planted deep within the elevators and within the core of the building itself while on the OUTSIDE and thus the PERIMETER of the floor plan, the OFFICES where people worked were on the outside edge of the square which is why you could look out of the building across New York City through the office windows. Plus if you observe how the plane hit the south tower, you would realize it MISSED THE CORE/COLUMNS/ELEVATORS of the building itself.
You are proving once again you are not paying attention. The 18 minute video from Xendrius explains it all. You are just closing your eyes and insulting people. At least blake has something to contribute and he deserves respect for that.
It's about the money that can be made on books and films, promoting alternative theories from the government's factually true story.
1. Xendrius doesn't charge money for his videos on youtube. Neither do many others. You have no point.
2. What about the people who believe the government's version and promote it in the media? Don't they get a paycheque too? OOPS I GUESS THAT INVALIDATES THEIR CLAIM MUSLIMS DID IT. Your own logic has been turned against you.

Now maybe you should realize that you can't disprove something a priori with little tricks like that and let science be the arbiter. Not whether someone charges or doesn't charge for their youtube videos. :roll:
The manipulation of time by extraterrestials, martians, spooks, whatever, is something that needs to be considered much more carefully Werd!
The fact that you're injecting nonsense and I guess, comedy, into the discussion shows you are trying to lead it astray. Which means I have to remind you once again. You are free to pick any of the three 9-11 topics on this board and pick a spot that you think been-there, myself or someone else made an error, point it out and then we can discuss it. You can behave with dignity and honour like blake. Or the opposite. Which is what you have done so far.

What is hilarious about that idiot who likes to play with pennies is that his whole argument about how fast pennies can fall has to do with pennies simply moving by the force of gravity with NOTHING UNDERNEATH THEM TO SLOW IT DOWN. In other words, it completely IGNORES the argument that guys like Richard Gage have made. That there was too much "stuff" below the top, broken and tilted part of the south tower for it to come down nearly in free fall time. In other words "penny-brain" compared apples and oranges when he compared pennies with NOTHING under them, to one section of the south tower with ABSOLUTELY ALMOST EVERYTHING ELSE under them. He just ignores the opposition, restates his argument and uses different, more fancy words to appear to know what he is talking about. Flowery language aside, I'm able to cut through his bullshit and detect his main argument and destroy it.

I'm not questioning his ability to do physics. He has obviously been to college. But even philosophically I can see it is being misapplied. Reason: He says it would only take X amount of time for one floor to collapse, and then something of a second for the next floor to collapse. SAYS WHO? That's what's being debated and questioned by guys like me due to all the STUFF that was left in the south tower below the part where the snap occurred and the top section fell off the center of gravity. He just takes the quick collapse pancake theory FOR GRANTED and then PLUGS it into his equation. HE BEGS THE QUESTION! :lol:

montgomery2
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by montgomery2 » Sun Oct 28, 2018 7:21 pm

Werd wrote:
Sat Oct 27, 2018 6:24 pm
Besides some people being batshit crazy conspiracists, there's another very valid reason for this kind of crap to be promoted.
Ad hominem fallacy.
Why is it that the supposed charges were placed exactly in the same places as the aircraft hit the towers?
Wrong. The explosive devices were planted deep within the elevators and within the core of the building itself while on the OUTSIDE and thus the PERIMETER of the floor plan, the buildings were on the outside edge of the square which is why you could look out of the building across New York City through the office windows. Plus if you observe how the plane hit the south tower, you would realize it MISSED THE CORE/COLUMNS/ELEVATORS of the building itself.
You are proving once again you are not paying attention. The 18 minute video from Xendrius explains it all. You are just closing your eyes and insulting people. At least blake has something to contribute and he deserves respect for that.
It's about the money that can be made on books and films, promoting alternative theories from the government's factually true story.
1. Xendrius doesn't charge money for his videos on youtube. Neither do many others. You have no point.
2. What about the people who believe the government's version and promote it in the media? Don't they get a paycheque too? OOPS I GUESS THAT INVALIDATES THEIR CLAIM MUSLIMS DID IT. Your own logic has been turned against you.

Now maybe you should realize that you can't disprove something a priori with little tricks like that and let science be the arbiter. Not whether someone charges or doesn't charge for their youtube videos. :roll:
The manipulation of time by extraterrestials, martians, spooks, whatever, is something that needs to be considered much more carefully Werd!
The fact that you're injecting nonsense and I guess, comedy, into the discussion shows you are trying to lead it astray. Which means I have to remind you once again. You are free to pick any of the three 9-11 topics on this board and pick a spot that you think been-there, myself or someone else made an error, point it out and then we can discuss it. You can behave with dignity and honour like blake. Or the opposite. Which is what you have done so far.

What is hilarious about that idiot who likes to play with pennies is that his whole argument about how fast pennies can fall has to do with pennies simply moving by the force of gravity with NOTHING UNDERNEATH THEM TO SLOW IT DOWN. In other words, it completely IGNORES the argument that guys like Richard Gage have made. That there was too much "stuff" below the top, broken and tilted part of the south tower for it to come down nearly in free fall time. In other words "penny-brain" compared apples and oranges when he compared pennies with NOTHING under them, to one section of the south tower with ABSOLUTELY ALMOST EVERYTHING ELSE under them. He just ignores the opposition, restates his argument and uses different, more fancy words to appear to know what he is talking about. Flowery language aside, I'm able to cut through his bullshit and detect his main argument and destroy it.

I'm not questioning his ability to do physics. He has obviously been to college. But even philosophically I can see it is being misapplied. Reason: He says it would only take X amount of time for one floor to collapse, and then something of a second for the next floor to collapse. SAYS WHO? That's what's being debated and questioned by guys like me due to all the STUFF that was left in the south tower below the part where the snap occurred and the top section fell off the center of gravity. He just takes the quick collapse pancake theory FOR GRANTED and then PLUGS it into his equation. HE BEGS THE QUESTION! :lol:
You really do believe in yourself don't you! You're passionate about your stupid conspriacy theory!

And you're mentally ill. I'm outta this with you Werd.

My confession: I'm a CIA agent sent here to convince people like you that the government's story is true. Don't believe a word I say! And of course it was preset charges that took down the twin towers, as you have contended all along. I can't fool all of the people all of the time, but.........................................................

Werd
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by Werd » Sun Oct 28, 2018 7:25 pm

You're passionate about your stupid conspriacy theory!

And you're mentally ill. I'm outta this with you Werd.
Make that two more ad hominem fallacies as he leaves while stamping his feet, loudly declaring victory. :roll:

montgomery2
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by montgomery2 » Mon Oct 29, 2018 1:37 pm

Werd wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 7:25 pm
You're passionate about your stupid conspriacy theory!

And you're mentally ill. I'm outta this with you Werd.
Make that two more ad hominem fallacies as he leaves while stamping his feet, loudly declaring victory. :roll:
See my quite outrageous explanation on another thread on why building 7 is shown coming down when the lady said it had already come down.

Yes, I know it's outrageous and perhaps less believable than the time warp that was manipulated by the govmunt!

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 7790
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: 911 contradictions

Post by been-there » Sat Dec 22, 2018 8:58 am

Dec 21, 2018 |

9/11-truth leaders celebrate a breakthrough: Ed Asner and Richard Gage on the grand juryiInvestigation



Yesterday, the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry and AE911Truth surpassed our fundraising goal of $50,000 for the Grand Jury Investigation Project. We’re deeply grateful to everyone who donated over the past ten days — and to the thousands who’ve contributed in one way or another to getting the WTC evidence in front of a grand jury.

If you haven’t yet donated and you wish to support this historic effort, it’s not too late to make a difference with your year-end donation. The Lawyers’ Committee and AE911Truth will make use of every last dollar as we work to ensure a thorough and successful grand jury investigation.

Today, we’re delighted to bring you this week’s episode of 9/11 Free Fall with Richard Gage, AIA, and actor/activist Ed Asner, who serves on the Lawyers’ Committee board of directors. Together, Richard, Ed, and host Andy Steele remark on this incredible breakthrough and share their thoughts on never giving up the pursuit of 9/11 Truth and Justice.

On behalf of everyone at the Lawyers’ Committee and AE911Truth, we thank you for sending us into 2019 with the resources needed to push for a real 9/11 investigation. We wish you a very happy holiday!

Sincerely,

The AE911Truth Team

© 2018 AE911truth.org All rights reserved. 2342 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 189, Berkeley, CA 94704.
empowered by Salsa

https://www.ae911truth.org/news/508-9-1 ... estigation
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests