No-planers: I challenge you to explain how all the videos and photos....

Discussion in '9/11' started by LogicallyYours, Jun 23, 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. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I invite the readers to see NIST NCSTAR 1A
    http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610
    Page 46 Fig 3-15
    + you can find abundant references to this on "truther" web-pages.

    The fact of free fall acceleration indicates clearly
    that the resistance, that is ALL of the resistance
    had to have been removed from under the falling mass
    and ALL at the same time to achieve the result observed.
     
  2. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

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

    1. If what you say above is true, then why was there a brief period of NON FREE FALL before the free fall actually began? According to you, simultaneous removal of ALL resistance, ALL at the same time, means free fall.

    2. The free fall was an AVERAGE, not a constant. GO look at the graphs and explain why each point is grater than free fall or less than free fall.
     
  3. Sai Girl

    Sai Girl New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2014
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What a ridiculous discussion. The Towers exploded and disintegrated IN SECONDS, as is self-evident from the photos and videos. Look at them again if you have trouble digesting exactly what they show: Whatever the precise means that might have been used to blow them up, it's obvious that they were deliberately DEMOLISHED. They most certainly did not "collapse" spontaneously from jet fuel or office fires. And it's insulting to the intelligence of everyone here at this forum, to pretend that they were taken down by fire. They were blown to kingdom come. http://photos1.blogger.com/x/blogger2/2357/1113357475496390/1600/z/502327/gse_multipart43859.jpg
     
  4. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There are perfectly good examples of other venues to cause the "looks-like-explosions-" photos you see. Unfortunately, you don;t want to consider them.

    Spontaneously? LOL. I beg to differ.

    Also, you missed a characteristic that caused the collapses. IMPACTS that severed/weakened columns in ADDITION to the resultant fires. I guess you need to simplify the characteristics whenever you can to try and make your view more palatable.
     
  5. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    [video=youtube_share;bMZ-nkYr46w]http://youtu.be/bMZ-nkYr46w[/video]

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,726
    Likes Received:
    1,783
    Trophy Points:
    113


    so you think that a floor that cannot sustain its own weight can at the same time majcally have greater strength than its original design yield to "pull in" the perimeter?

    Are there gremlins applying voodoo reinforcement is that it? or how can that be possible except in the twisted minds of debunkers?
     
  7. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    a floor slab that stays connected to the central core and outer wall exactly as required to produce the result, is a bit of a stretch, the truss connections stay intact until it is time for them to disconnect to produce the observed result.
     
  8. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It would explain the observed deformation inward of the outer structure before collapse.
     
  9. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,726
    Likes Received:
    1,783
    Trophy Points:
    113
    it would if it were not a completely lunatic theory. Did you even remotely grasp what I explained in my previous post?
     
  10. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So, pictures and observations at the site, etc., are just completely lunatic and we are instead supposed to believe the ramblings of a truther? LOL
     
  11. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,726
    Likes Received:
    1,783
    Trophy Points:
    113
    there may be nothing wrong with the observations, however there are some grossly intellectually impaired forensic debunkers out there who have no clue what so ever how to interpret those observations. There are also hordes of debunker parrots thoughtlessly parroting those same mindless debunkers, despite the fact that we know all debunkers are experts.

    You just happened across one of those grossly intellectually impaired debunker loony theories.
     
  12. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So Phd's are thoughtless debunker parrots but people like you know the real science? Bwaaaahahahaha!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Here you go, this must have happened because of truther magic too.

    [​IMG]

    Air France flight 358 didn't hit a steel building at 500 miles an hour. It didn't even burn the fuel in the wings, yet its aluminum skin melted to the ground. It simply went off the runway and caught fire.
     
  13. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,726
    Likes Received:
    1,783
    Trophy Points:
    113
    fine then cite and quote the phds you want to convince us applies here.

    oh and hint: a burned out plane hull proves my point not yours LOL
     
  14. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

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


    Well, that's that exactly accurate to say that it didn't collapse at free fall either. The evidence here: http://www.ae911truth.org/en/evidence/35-key-facts/275-nist-admits-freefall.html
    WTC7 in Freefall - No Longer Controversial (9:29 min)
    NIST Admits Freefall Part I (10:48 min)
    NIST Admits Freefall Part II (5:40 min)
    NIST Admits Freefall Part III (10:17 min)

    NIST admits it so now who is doing the speculating, and who is offering fact?
     
  15. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Argument from fallacy. NIST did no such thing.
    Try again.
     
  16. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think the link speaks for itself (several times). To simply say otherwise isn't exactly accurate.
     
  17. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yet you can't link to NIST actually stating it. You are relying on second and third hand information.
     
  18. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    John Gross didn't represent NIST in any capacity whatsoever? That what you're contending?
     
  19. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    When did he say it?
     
  20. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    18,998
    Likes Received:
    3,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    NIST never admitted to any such thing.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The video does not quote the NIST report at all and they admitted no such thing

    - - - Updated - - -

    The NIST report was not one persons representation your silly twoofer video is innuendo and rumoor without a quote from the NIST report.

    Even if John Gross were involved in the investigation it is irrelevant as he does not represent them in the video you posted.

    YOu are proven wrong
     
  21. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Simple yes or no really. Do you contend that he DID NOT represent NIST? He clearly DID so, your answer will tell me something. I'll be happy to post evidence that he was, in the event you choose to say that he didn't.
     
  22. Shangrila

    Shangrila staff Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    29,114
    Likes Received:
    674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Please stop the back and forth baiting and discuss the topic

    Thanks
    Shangrila
    PF Moderator
     
  23. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    A major objection I have to how these discussion have
    gone, is the fact that somebody can produce a paragraph
    or more of data, real INFORMATION, and some members
    of the opposition ... simply post "that isn't the way it is"
    and with no additional data or explanation its simply as
    much as that is wrong because I said it was wrong.
    not very convincing for the opposition.
     
  24. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I asked you when he said it..I said nothing about him not representing the NIST
     
  25. MkStevenson

    MkStevenson Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The date is easy enough to reference. So, he didn't represent NIST, in your opinion, or did he?
     

Share This Page