Thoughtless WTC Conclusions

Discussion in '9/11' started by Kokomojojo, Mar 2, 2019.

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. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,802
    Likes Received:
    11,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, that's a terrific "argument" you offer, as only believers in the OCT can do. Never, NEVER address the topic or the meaning, and ALWAYS attack the messenger.

    Thanks for consistency.
     
  2. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,802
    Likes Received:
    11,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, with your fantastic assistance, I am demonstrating how the faithful to the OCT will never address facts and evidence. They will change the subject, ignore the points and facts, and engage in ad hominem attacks, post silly guffaws in capital letters with color often, but they will never address the important issues.

    As you have demonstrated here, they will never touch upon the significance of massive explosions in the basements 14 and 17 seconds prior to the aircraft strike, as recorded on instruments and reported by witnesses present.

    No sir, the OCT faithful like you will never ever address the facts. It is Cognitive Dissonance in action.
     
  3. yasureoktoo

    yasureoktoo Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    9,808
    Likes Received:
    2,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOLOLOOL

    Most people never even read the OCT, but it is the only generic excuse you have.
    Blame the OCT.

    It's funny watching you people squirm.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  4. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113

    :roflol:

    Ironic PROJECTION on ALL COUNTS since you just did EXACTLY what you fallaciously accused me of doing!

    I addressed ALL of the FACTS!

    I EXPOSED that there is NO FACTUAL EVIDENCE supporting your "nuclear explosion" bovine excrement!

    I have provided a SANE, REASONABLE and LOGICAL explanation for a trifling discrepancy!

    But your CONFIRMATION BIAS refuses to allow you to deal with any of the above which is why you just threw a typical troofer foot stomping hissyfit in the content of your post!

    :roflol:

    Thanks for DISQUALIFYING yourself from any further meaningful interaction on this topic as far as I am concerned.

    Have a nice day!
     
  5. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,802
    Likes Received:
    11,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, take your marbles and go back home.

    An honest poster would at least attempt to explain his interpretation of why the airplanes striking the towers after the basement explosions either was or was not a problem for the official story.

    A poster not afflicted with cognitive dissonance would quickly understand that Rodriguez' testimony and the science and facts of those gaps were fatal to the OCT.

    Alas, so often we are not what we think we are.
     
  6. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,726
    Likes Received:
    1,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    proof you know nothing what so ever about nukes, dont ask I dont argue with anyone who knows little or nothing about nukes.
    here again, if you wantched the towers come down and were unable to clearly see the explosions, again arguing with people in denial about it would be a total waste of time.
    right! they have a story line to put out
    More like 2 explosions and 3 collapses
    Simple, they never bothered to look.
    depends on the circumstances, you know that. dont you?
    the one that created that HUGE crater, or course
    prove there was a plane. you cant all OCTers can do is ridicule since they are in denial after all.
    Even the news people claimed there was a HUGE explosion, you people simply deny everything all the time.
    Do you have evidence proving that it would show up? Post it please
    you need to make a distinction between no evidence and no acknowledgement of evidence by our negligent gubmint.
    Oh thats right, that would violate the one and only one method rule.
    thermitic products certainly can and do explode
    you really need to take the time make the proper distinction between the 2
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2019
    Eleuthera likes this.
  7. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,726
    Likes Received:
    1,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    for you it apparently does

    100's of witnesses and the expert arm chair commandos on this site claim everyone else is wrong, there were no explosions, who ya gonna believe! LOL
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2019
    Bob0627 likes this.
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    According to many OCT loving posters who weren't there, none of these explosions were caused by explosives and eyewitness claims are the least reliable form of evidence. So instead of demanding that these eyewitness claims of explosions actually be officially investigated (they never were), it's better to believe they were caused by anything but explosives and leave it at that.

    "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." - Albert Einstein
     
    Eleuthera and Scott like this.
  9. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113

    None of those people knew anything at all about strengths of materials and the explosive sounds that occur when they fail.



    Just because you hear a loud noise does NOT mean that any explosives are involved.

    The was ZERO EVIDENCE of explosives!

    There was MASSES OF EVIDENCE of steel beams that FAILED under the stresses involved and they would ALL have sounded like "explosions" when they failed just as it sounds like a explosion in the video.
     
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The very next post:

    Right on cue.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  11. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There is no evidence of EXPLOSIVES. Period. You have nothing.
     
    l4zarus and Derideo_Te like this.
  12. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,802
    Likes Received:
    11,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    LOL, with that one you have both feet in your mouth. :applause:
     
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thanks for confirming what I posted. You can’t find evidence if you don’t look for it. Regardless the evidence is overwhelming but not for you of course.

    I never said I did. The evidence stands on its own merit, it isn’t mine or anyone else’s. It belongs to no one.
     
  14. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    [/QUOTE]I never said I did. [/QUOTE]

    Bobby, YOU made the statement below did you not? You are declaring the "OCT" as "heinous" and a "massive criminal fraud"? In order make those claims you have to have some evidence that supports your claims right Bobby? You have none.

    The so called "evidence for demolition" provided to the jury is nothing of the sort. This will be proven when nothing comes of it and you start claiming it was all a sham.
     
  15. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That’s correct as already explained I don’t own any evidence. The evidence speaks for itself and supports the above 100%.

    Fortunately that’s up to the grand jury to decide and not up to you or your crystal ball.
     
  16. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,802
    Likes Received:
    11,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You haven't made a point to rebut. You have simply offered a terrific display of denial of facts. You will not say a word about the meaning of a 14 second and 17 second time disparity that renders the OCT invalid. Not a word. I know what that means.
     
    Kokomojojo likes this.
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As explained, you're correct, I have no evidence. The evidence that the OCT is a fraud stands on its own merit:

    Summary of Issues With the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report

    1. The Bush administration is directly responsible for the wholesale destruction of 9/11 evidence, in violation of federal and local law, thus hampering/corrupting any investigation.
    2. The Bush administration did not want to investigate 9/11, in fact they (or more specifically Cheney) asked Sen. Tom Daschle not to investigate 9/11 on several occasions.
    3. The Bush administration reluctantly yielded to investigating 9/11 due to pressure from the 9/11 families, specifically the Jersey Girls but wanted the investigation to only focus on intelligence failures.
    4. The Bush administration appointed Henry Kissinger as the chairman of the 9/11 Commission who was subsequently forced to resign due to conflicts of interest.
    5. The Bush administration stocked the 9/11 Commission with cronies, especially Philip Zelikow.
    6. All members of the 9/11 Commission had conflicts of interest and were covering for someone.
    7. The 9/11 Commission cut a deal with the Bush administration essentially allowing them to dictate who on the 9/11 Commission could see what evidence and also limited the evidence the 9/11 Commission had access to.
    8. According to the 9/11 Commission, there are 570 cubic feet of textual records, a large percentage of it classified, presumably inaccessible to the 9/11 Commission itself (see #7).
    9. Sen. Max Cleland resigned as a result of #7, labeling the 9/11 investigation a scam and obstruction.
    10. The 9/11 families or more specifically the Family Steering Committee sent over 400 questions to the 9/11 Commission and the vast majority of the questions were either unanswered or insufficiently answered.
    11. Philip Zelikow created an outline of the 9/11 Commission Report prior to the first meeting of the 9/11 Commission.
    12. Philip Zelikow admitted that most if not all of the 9/11 Commission Report relied on 3rd party relayed torture testimony.
    13. The source of over 25% of the Commission Report's footnotes is 3rd party relayed torture testimony.
    14. The 9/11 Commission were lied to by the CIA who told them they gave them everything they asked for but withheld torture tapes which they never revealed their existence to the 9/11 Commission.
    15. The torture tapes were deliberately destroyed by the CIA despite a federal court order to preserve them.
    16. The Senate Intelligence Committee on Torture report claims that the CIA's torture methods yielded NO USEFUL INTELLIGENCE (see #12 and #13).
    17. Page 146 of the 9/11 Commission Report contains a full disclaimer of Chapters 5 and 7 (see #12, #13 and #16). This is effectively an admission by the 9/11 Commission Report that two key chapters of the 9/11 Commission Report are totally unreliable (and therefore deceptions meant to be promoted as fact).
    18. The FBI lied to the 9/11 Commission (and Congress) when they told them they gave them everything. They were discovered a decade later to be holding over 80,000 pages of documents from their PENTBBOM "investigation" that they never revealed existed.
    19. NORAD and other key Pentagon officials told the 9/11 Commission different stories that were in conflict with each other or outright lies.
    20. The 9/11 Commission agreed to interview Bush and Cheney together unsworn and unrecorded.
    21. There is no evidence that the 9/11 Commission conducted any criminal/scientific/forensic investigation in accordance with universally accepted standards appropriate for such an investigation. Especially within the vast scope required by a major historical event such as 9/11. Much of the contents of the 9/11 Commission Report is unvetted and/or unsupported by legitimate evidence (any evidence obtained via the use of torture is illegitimate/unreliable - see #16).
    22. The 9/11 Commission claimed in their report that "their aim has not been to assign individual blame", thus making a mockery of the "investigation".
    23. Eyewitnesses who were to testify to the 9/11 Commission were coached by Soviet style government "minders" prior to their testimonies, thus tampering with, biasing and corrupting the "investigation".
    24. Many potential crucial eyewitnesses were never interviewed by the 9/11 Commission. Potential whistleblowers were not granted immunity and therefore many did not testify as a result.
    25. Some key eyewitness testimonies were excluded from the 9/11 Commission Report.
    26. The 9/11 Commission failed to investigate key events and issues, such as the destruction of WTC7 (unmentioned) and the financing of 9/11, deeming it of "little practical significance" (in direct contradiction to all criminal investigation standards).
    27. The 9/11 Commission co-chairs admitted they were set up to fail, starved of funds, denied access to the truth, misled by senior officials in the Pentagon and the FAA, did not examine key evidence, claimed the report was incomplete and flawed and that many questions remain unanswered.
    28. Philip Zelikow had complete control over the final edit of the 9/11 Commission Report and was responsible for keeping the classified 28 pages from the 9/11 Commission. Zelikow fired an aide who wanted to bring the 28 pages to the attention of the 9/11 Commission.
    29. The published version of the 9/11 Commission Report in general is similar to the official 9/11 conspiracy theory disseminated as fact by the Bush administration prior to the establishment of the 9/11 Commission.
    30. The 9/11 Commission Report was severely criticized by many, especially the Jersey Girls, who were responsible for pressuring the Bush administration for an investigation. "we knew it was a farce, we wanted their words, their lies down on paper" - Patty Casazza.

    Summary of problems with the NIST WTC Tower Report

    1. The claim that the upper part of the towers crushed the lower part of the towers violates the laws of conservation of momentum and the law that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. As shown by the measured smooth uninterrupted descent of the upper portion of the North Tower.

    2. NIST claims that the floor trusses in the aircraft impact zone push outward on the perimeter columns with a force of about 80 KIPS before starting to sag and pull the columns inward to cause the building to collapse. Yet there is no evidence to support this claim. Extensive photos and videos of the towers show no outward bowing of the perimeter columns at any time during the fires before the collapse.

    3. NIST imposed unrealistic artificial 5 KIP forces on each floor truss to column connection over the 5 stories of the damage zone on the south face of the North Tower in order to make their collapse initiation model work. This amounts to a lateral force of about 750 KIPS applied artificially to that face of the building which cannot be justified by any rationale.

    4. NIST does not investigate or explain the global collapse which occurred after the collapse initiation was supposedly initiated by the column failures in the impact zone. NIST simply states, “global collapse ensued”.

    5. The NIST collapse sequence is initiated by the failure of the floor trusses in the impact zone and subsequent pulling in of the perimeter column. But the sequence ignores the fact that the core columns failed first, as evidenced by the video of the North Tower collapse showing that the antenna and hat truss resting on the core column began their descent well before the outer perimeter of the building began to fall. This fact invalidates the NIST collapse initiation theory.

    6. The NIST report fails to provide any information suggesting that the load capacity of the core and perimeter columns was exceeded at any time during the collapse sequence. NIST ignored the fact that the factor of safety of 3 in the core columns and 5 in the perimeter columns would have prevented the failure mechanism that is theorized in their collapse initiation model.

    7. The NIST global collapse theory depends upon the ASCE-published progressive collapse theory by Zdenek Bazant. His theory has been shown to have erroneous input data rendering it non-viable as an explanation for the observed behavior of the vertical propagation. ASCE refuses to acknowledge the errors in the input data of Bazant’s theory.

    All assumptions below, which were used in the NIST WTC7 report, have been shown to be erroneous, and correction of these assumptions invalidate the report's conclusions.

    1. A girder bearing seat width of 12 inches not 11 inches at column 79 would prevent girder walk off.

    2. The omitted stiffeners on girder A2001 at column 79 would have prevented the flange from folding and eliminated any chance of walk off.

    3. The thermally expanded girder A2001 could not move past the column 79 side plate.

    4. There were shear studs on girder A2001 and this would cause the beams to buckle before pushing the girder off its seat.

    5. All west and south girder connections to column 79 were not broken down to the 6th floor.

    6. A northeast corner floor failure could not cascade down eight floors so there is not enough energy to break through the girder connection on the next floor down.

    7. There were lateral support beams framing G3005 and they would have prevented it from buckling.

    8. Beam and girder notching to simulate their buckling due to the fire in the model is not consistent with the time phased weakening fire would produce.

    9. Evidence of temperatures high enough to melt steel as documented by FEMA was ignored.

    10. The NIST model shows radical deformation of the upper exterior as the east side interior collapses but this is not observed in actual footage of the video collapse.

    11. A simultaneous free fall of all four corners of the roofline does have implications.

    https://www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org/exhibits-index-grand-jury-petition/


    There is no evidence for those who will not see.

    There's not one thing above that I own, the overwhelming evidence that the OCT is a fraud stands on its own merit.
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2019
  18. Blaster3

    Blaster3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2018
    Messages:
    6,008
    Likes Received:
    5,302
    Trophy Points:
    113
    impossible for the fuel to enter that deep inside those floors, the tanks ruptured upon impact, at best a small amount of fuel from the center tank might have made it through to the elevators, once 'loose' and puddling in open air, no way it 'explodes' cause it was not confined...

    pour 1000 gallons of gasoline down a vast hole along with a lit flare, just a huge woooosh and heat, no explosive 'bomb' type damage...
     
    Eleuthera and Bob0627 like this.
  19. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fortunately the CONTENT of my posts EXPOSES that ludicrous canard.

    Perhaps you could try actually reading them next time and asking me about the parts you had difficulty understanding.
     
    l4zarus likes this.
  20. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There was no evidence of any explosions anywhere at the WTC site.
     
  21. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,726
    Likes Received:
    1,790
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If everyone wants a good laugh compare the above alleged proof of claims there were no explosions from the OCT, pretending that a breaking beams sound the same to:



    These REAL explosions at the WTC

    FALSE! There WERE MASSIVE EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVES
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
    Eleuthera likes this.
  22. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,802
    Likes Received:
    11,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The content of your posts shows a poster desperate to avoid facing reality. The content of your posts is vacuous drivel employed to avoid dealing with inconvenient facts.
     
  23. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There was? Can you provide the links to this evidence showing explosives were used?
     
    l4zarus and Derideo_Te like this.
  24. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

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

    So the thermite supposedly found by Harrit was used in shape charges to cut the steel and not used to burn through the steel?
     
    l4zarus likes this.
  25. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Like what circumstances Koko? Which particular circumstances existed on 9/11 that would allow an explosion to show up on a seismograph, but NOT allow a jet smashing into a building to show up.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.

Share This Page