About time the young minds are being allowed to open up and consider the many facets of 9/11 and see if it passes the smell test. I wish I could send my kid there. http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-s...-repeats-its-success-at-st-marys-college.html
It figures that little Dickie was invited by an old coot with no applicable credentials to teach his trollery to a bunch of spoiled yuppie larvae. Maybe they can go out later and play with their blocks together. And maybe that vapid twit Hoffman will explain to them how you calibrate the human Mark I eyeball to measure the weight of a dust plume. What a clown show.
You and the rest of the truthers call your flights of fantasy "truth", yet you can't prove your theories, by your own admission you have no evidence to back up your theories, and you can't defend your theories. How does that make it "truth"? Clinically the collective theories of the truthers would be classified as paranoid delusions. BTW, how do you justify the kids being allowed to consider the many facets of 9/11 when the only people allowed to speak are the truthers? When you have nobody to defend the truth, liars like the truthers at AE911truth can say whatever they want unchallenged. A good example is the article claims the kids were shown evidence of controlled demolition. Really? Why can't they show the rest of us? Oh right. They pretend opinion is actually evidence and ignore the true facts of the case.
I have my students study 9/11 every semester for a brief period, as part of a course on criminal law, regarding terrorism. Not one of them has ever come back saying the towers were demolished by explosives. Probably because they have more than 4 brain cells to rub together. I have a theory that I think any sensible person would agree has just as much credibility as the thought that thousands of people who worked in WTC simply ignored the demolition wiring going on around them, and that hundreds of workers who did the demolition wiring have all remained silent for a decade:
Amazing....have a good looking female asking the survey questions at an all mens university.......talk about failing the smell test....
Amazing....have a good looking female asking the survey questions at an all mens university.......talk about failing the smell test....
Yes. Those seemingly intelligent students should also watch this. http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC_Not_A_Demolition And also read this. http://www.sawyerhome.net/whatilearned.html And decide for themselves which is more credible. Because when you get curious and start looking at the truther info, on the surface and because of the misleading way they make their cases, it seems believable at first. It did to me back in September of last year when I first started looking into it. But then as I dug deeper and looked at more sources of information it became pretty obvious that the truther theories could not stand up to logical scrutiny of any kind and ARE NOT BACKED UP by physical evidence.
Subjects like this have been in Australian universities pre 2008, i should know because I participated in 2008.
Well, the goobment could refute these claims and offer up what "really" happened. We say controlled demolition. We say nanothermite was found. What's the "official" rebuttal? Believe me, if they had one, they'd sure as s*it use it., but, they don't. Anytime, some "official" wants to take to the press, the airwaves, the tv...hey...we'll all be watchin'. Bring it on.They won't do that though, because the speculation and the misinformation continually swirls and keeps the truth smokey, which plays to the criminal's advantage. Best to just say nothing, and so they don't. So....we'll step up and teach, if the goobment is not willing to.
Who said anything about wiring??? I believe the nano t was mixed in with the paint, and the crew happily painted it on. They never knew what they were painting on. See how that works? It's called compartmentalization. Happens all the time in the world of espionage.
plus mixing the thermite with an inert carrier like paintwould lessen the effectivness......besides,why paint the thermite on,and then spray fire retardant right over it?
Ah. Truther ignorance exposing itself once again. How does nano thermite work? Through heat. The byproduct of any kind of thermite is superheated molten iron. The layer of paint needed to actually do anything would be MASSIVE!!! And then let's look at the other falacy of the truther lie of nano thermite paint. Why does nano thermite react better than regular thermite? Because the particles are smaller and the reaction can happen faster. Mix it in paint and guess what you've done. You've completely FUBARed the reaction between the iron oxide and the aluminum no matter HOW small the particles are because the particles are not together. Why else do you think not a single truther has been able to demonstrate nano thermite paint? Yet despite this evidence they can't refute, truthers will continue to pretend any bull(*)(*)(*)(*) they dream up is what really happened including the fantasy that is nano thermite paint.
Heat applied to the iron oxide releases the oxygen from the molecule which is free to bond with the aluminum. The product is iron and aluminum oxide. The overall reaction is exothermic so the heat of the reaction precipitates the release of more oxygen. The reaction continues until the supply of iron oxide is exhausted, or the heat of the reaction dips below the temperature needed to release more oxygen. A thin layer of thermite coating a large mass of iron could not maintain the heat of reaction for a significant period of time. The iron, being conductive, would conduct the heat away from the reaction. Someone who coated a beam with a paint thin layer of thermite would notice that the reaction would be contained within a short distance of the point of ignition, as the heat of ignition would be rapidly dissipated through the mass of the beam. That being said, RWF. Who are these people that painted these beams? Can you located any of them? Who added the thermite to the paint? Who ignited the paint and how was it ignited?
Actually, what I see is called "speculation". It happens a lot when there is no evidence to support a claim.
A person has no responsibility to refute obvious nonsense. Suggesting the government needs to "refute" 9/11 deniers is like saying historians need to "refute" every kook in an asylum that thinks they're Elvis or Napoleon. Everyone who's sane knows they're not really Elvis, and anyone who thinks they are won't listen to reason no matter how you tell them. You did, when you suggested "controlled demolition," which requires ignition of some sort. And when did this take place? And why has no one come forward to say they "painted" the beams? How were beams painted that were behind walls? How does any substance burn sideways, as would be necessary to shear vertical beams? twoofer deflection in 3... 2... 1...
Who authorized sending anthrax to US Senators? This poison came from a US military installation....Lot of unanswered questions...
Several white nationalist groups have been known to have obtained samples of the same strain. They probably have several moles at CDC. An intelligence operative would have at least known to write the extortion note like an Arab. Making it clear that it is a false-flag operation just makes people look harder for the American traitor who was using this to tear down civilian government.
With the high heat source of the plane's fuel, fires. The buildings were the match, the planes lit the match. Easy stuff here.
Nano-thermite paint theories are only promoted by those who don't care how badly they destroy their credibility and honesty. RWAF, you've already been shown nano-thermite paint doesn't exist and that even if it did exist, such a thin layer would do nothing but warm up the column a little. It is not a high explosive and even if it were, a thin layer of high explosive would do nothing. I'm sensing that your theories are getting more and more desperate as more and more truther theories are known as complete bull(*)(*)(*)(*).