Hard facts that there is no way around

Discussion in '9/11' started by MkStevenson, Jul 15, 2014.

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. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    John Gross (of NIST fame) is again mentioned here in this link of 'hard to argue' points of contention that non believers of the official story offer up repeatedly. I challenge one to pick any THREE and to show how ANY three cannot be in dispute, and show why.
    http://www.collective-evolution.com...t-911-that-cannot-be-debunked/comment-page-5/

    Let's discuss the particulars as referenced here, and have a discussion, minus the insults and rhetoric. Please. If nobody picks three, then I shall.
     
  2. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not one single fact on that page.

    Not one.
     
  3. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    One blanket statement without discussing anything in any detail. Got it. Anyone else?
     
  4. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "Not one" Well that certainly settles that.
    thank you ever so much for the wisdom.
     
  5. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ok, I'll expand.

    everything stated on that page is an outright lie, extreme exaggeration, or pathetic strawman.

    - - - Updated - - -

    furthermore, if all the things on that page were actually "FACTS", there would have been a massive investigation by Congress years ago.
     
  6. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Did John Gross represent NIST? That should be simple enough to answer.
     
  7. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    if these were all facts, there would have been a massive Congressional investigation.
     
  8. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    One would certainly think so, except that there wasn't. Common sense should take over at some point too and easily disprove the official version too but, that doesn't happen easily either. Maybe people are just too stuck to their iphones to care then. You can still pick 3 and discuss the details, or you can continue to avoid the particulars. Your choice.
     
  9. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Question:
    do you believe that Congress actually works for the
    rank&file worker/taxpayer ( etc.... ) or do they work
    for BigBux INC? what do you think?
     
  10. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    what's the point? the 9-11 Truth Movement is a miserable failure.
     
  11. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Most of that is conjecture or fantasy and everything that isn't has been explained previously but in truther world, no reading is allowed.
     
  12. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gotcha. You'll stick to the official version of events, no matter what, and despite anything counter to it. Anyone else?
     
  13. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You're convinced that no matter what, you'll refuse to consider anything that doesn't fit with the official version of events, and you refuse to discuss any particulars whatsoever. I think I understand your position perfectly. Thanks. Anyone else?
     
  14. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I will stick with logic, physics, and math. I will leave conspiracy, fantasy, and incredulity to you.
     
  15. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The official version of it all, regardless of where it leads or doesn't lead, yes. I got that the first time. Blind faith, so to speak. Thanks again.
     
  16. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
  17. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'll stick with physics, logic and math (combined with a bit of my own common sense thrown in, just for fun).
     
  18. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
    MIT computed the outer wall to dissipate only 4% of the energy, the aircraft itself about 23%, the core around 25% with the floors absorbing up to around 50%.

    [video=youtube_share;cddIgb1nGJ8]http://youtu.be/cddIgb1nGJ8[/video]
     
  19. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,681
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and YOU refuse to accept that the WTC towers were brought down by impact damage, fire, weakened steel, and gravity.
     
  20. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There are some of the points listed that are problematic
    ( for me at least ) however the list I give here is a selection
    of the ones that have the most substance when it comes to
    asserting that 9/11 was an inside job.

    3) The total collapse of WTC 7 in 6.5 seconds at free fall acceleration (NIST admits 2.25 seconds). Larry Silverstein used the term “Pull it”. Steel framed high rise buildings have NEVER totally collapsed from fire or structural damage. Builidng 7 was not hit by a plane. ‘Building 7′, ‘WTC 7′.

    8 ) 100′s of Firefighters and witness testimony to BOMBS/EXPLOSIONS ignored by the 9/11 Commission Report. 9/11 Commission Report bars 503 1st responder eyewitnesses. “Explosions in the lobby and sub levels”, ‘Firefighter explosions’, ‘Barry Jennings’, ‘William Rodriguez’.

    9) 100′s of firefighters and witness testimony to MOLTEN METAL ignored by the Commission report. “Like you’re in a foundry”, “NIST’s John Gross denies the existence of Molten Metal”, ‘Swiss Cheese’, “As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running.” Leslie Robertson’.

    13) Towers were built to withstand a Boeing jet(s). “I designed it for a 707 to hit it”, Leslie Robertson, WTC structural engineer. “Could probably sustain multiple impacts of jetliners”, “like a pencil puncturing screen netting” Frank De Martini, deceased Manager of WTC Construction & Project Management. “As far as a plane knocking a building over, that would not happen.” Charlie Thornton, Structural Engineer.

    23) Insider trading based upon foreknowledge. ‘Put Options.’ Never identified insiders made millions. ‘United and American Airlines’ ‘Raytheon.’
     
  21. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    All false. Someone made up a bunch of propaganda and placed it all on that page.

    'Truthers' will blindly follow it faithfully, of course.
     
  22. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    19,024
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    His blanket statement is correct especially since the detailed discussion you are asking for has been done to death on this forum and it's threads.

    You are asking for people to say the same things over again which is typical twoofer tactic: keep ignoring answers and pretend you have some new challenge which has never been debunked.

    - - - Updated - - -

    In the video you linked to no he was not.

    Whether he did in the past is irrelevant

    - - - Updated - - -

    There is no evidence to counter it as the other poster said only fantasy and conjecture
     
  23. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    19,024
    Likes Received:
    3,624
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Except that WTC 7 did not collapse at free fall acceleration. The term " pull it " referred to units of fire fighters battling the fire. Other steel framed high rise buioldings have collapsed from fire and or structural damage.

    Not one fire fighter of eyewitness gave testimony of a bomb. Some heard explosions which is normal in any large building fire.

    Molten metal 21 days later is normal in a pile of rubble which has been burning the whole time.

    They were not designed to withstand such impacts as you say it was hoped that they would do so.

    Truthers need to learn what is true
     
  24. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Sure thing.

    Harrit did not find thermite in his study. He found paint chips. There is so many things wrong with Harrit's report it's ridiculous. Want to discuss?
     
  25. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    and all these bits are presented without
    any support, its supposed to be self-evident
    or something and that is that, its as if you said
    this is true because I said its true.
     

Share This Page