You must first have evidence that has survived criticism. Bona fide evidence . Then (and only then) can you construct a theory in which the evidence is presented.
This description of the scientific method is really so simple that I must insist that anyone, even your goodself, can understand it. Whether you use it is of course another issue.
You must first have evidence that has survived criticism. Bona fide evidence . Then (and only then) can you construct a theory in which the evidence is presented.
This description of the scientific method is really so simple that I must insist that anyone, even your goodself, can understand it. Whether you use it is of course another issue.
Which scientific method are you using then? Karl Popper must be spinning in his grave. _________________ It's a man's life in MOSSAD
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 5:47 pm Post subject:
Roadrunner wrote:
Chek,
You must first have evidence that has survived criticism. Bona fide evidence . Then (and only then) can you construct a theory in which the evidence is presented.
This description of the scientific method is really so simple that I must insist that anyone, even your goodself, can understand it. Whether you use it is of course another issue.
Typing meaningless sentences does not constitute an answer.
Go back to page one of this thread and show where the error is.
You won't do that of course because there isn't one and you prefer to cling to your shoddy killtownish illusions.
As your next nothing answer will clearly show. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Your stupid attitude is plastered all over this forum in your recent posts. You and your fellow stooges want to talk about cinema on threads which are dealing with the tragedy of 9/11 and on aspects of its investigation.
You are an idiot, a fool, and a very very stupid man. And you're busted.
Please go away. You are not worthy of membership on this forum or any other.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 4:19 pm Post subject:
I see that despite Roadrunner's spamming for the no plane/media fakery trolls we're almost up to 3500 views on this topic - and yet still no relevant responses from those Evaders and Subject Changers for Truth.
Maybe this little bump will remind him of the accountability he so much likes to preach and prattle about. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Your stupid attitude is plastered all over this forum in your recent posts. You and your fellow stooges want to talk about cinema on threads which are dealing with the tragedy of 9/11 and on aspects of its investigation.
You are an idiot, a fool, and a very very stupid man. And you're busted.
Please go away. You are not worthy of membership on this forum or any other.
You are not one to talk. With every letter you type, you infect everything you touch with ever-increasing amounts of stupidity. Your every post is the worst sort of absolute drivel, and on any other forum, your pointless bulls**t alone would have earned you a banning long ago. Fortunately for you, and unfortunately for us, the moderators here are much kinder to the mentally shortchanged.
Every time you hit that 'post' button, you bring shame onto the memory of the people that died that day. Your every worthless word does nothing to advance any sort of truth, whatever that truth may end up being, and rather, harms it a great deal. You are a nasty, pointless, rhetorical piece of work whom I can only assume the idea of an independent thought is so foreign to as to cause sickness.
You have no interest in any truth. Or rather, any truth that doesn't fit your preset notions. You have no interest in rational debate, in posting anything of any worth whatsoever, and were it up to me, your a** would've been out the door LONG ago. Banning you would not stifle debate; it would just make pages load faster. _________________ "What about a dance club that only let in deaf people? It would really only need flashing lights, so they'd save a lot of money on music." - Dresden Codak
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 2:17 pm Post subject:
I think allowances need to be made for those like Indubroadadelphia who aren't operating on the same plane as most of us.
There is no empirical evidence, because everything that doesn't agree with their viewpoint is 'fake'.
Take the now infamous case of the heli-missile for instance.
'Good morning and thank you for calling Mintruth Media Inc'
"Hi, this is Perp Central here. We have a little problem with some footage we'd rather wasn't seen in its present format".
'That shouldn't be a problem. I'll transfer you through to our HHM team. One moment please'.
"Hi, this is Perp Central here. Am I speaking to the right person to have some newsreel footage modified?"
'Yes you are. Brickshitowski of Holographics and History Modification here- how may I help you?'
"It appears one of our missiles fired at the WTC made it through the filter and is plainly visible to anyone trawling the video archive. Can you fix that?"
'Sure no problem at all. An hours work. We'll just smack on a couple of overlays, re-composite the scene re-adjust the colour balance and re-render and nobody will....'
"Er, no sorry. That might be too obvious".
'I'm sorry?'
"Yeah ... uh ... we'd like you to morph the missile into a helicopter slowly - say over a week or so. It appears a "researcher" has been taking an interest in this particular cut, so we don't want to draw any attention to any sudden changes".
'I ... er ... see. Well normally we just get the team in the video lab to matte overlay these things and pop it back on the server and that's it - job done. We do it all the...'
"Well we suspect we've got a very observant one here, but he's cautious - so if it could change from a normal common or garden missile on say Monday morning and gradually be made into an NYPD helicopter by Saturday with no sudden and attention grabbing changes, that would be swell".
'You sure about this? I mean a missile/helicopter imaging swap is just standard rate. But what you're asking for is like ten times the work. I'll have to call in another specialist. We can do it, but it'll cost.'
"It's what the Committee's decided - I'm just relaying their instructions so don't worry about the cost."
'Ok then. The customer's always right. One full grown chopper by Saturday it is. Normal billing address?'
"Yep - Rudy 2008 as usual.
And thanks - the Committee appreciates friends who like to help".
*** *** *** *** ***
C'mon - admit it y'all.
Doesn't everyone wish we lived in a world that exciting? _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:34 pm Post subject:
Wow - so many "researchers" in tonight.
I bet they'd like the chance to add a comment or two, hence the bump. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Joined: 20 Feb 2007 Posts: 370 Location: Phuket, Thailand
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:26 am Post subject: Nice one
Nice one
TmcMistress wrote:
Roadrunner wrote:
Chek,
Your stupid attitude is plastered all over this forum in your recent posts. You and your fellow stooges want to talk about cinema on threads which are dealing with the tragedy of 9/11 and on aspects of its investigation.
You are an idiot, a fool, and a very very stupid man. And you're busted.
Please go away. You are not worthy of membership on this forum or any other.
You are not one to talk. With every letter you type, you infect everything you touch with ever-increasing amounts of stupidity. Your every post is the worst sort of absolute drivel, and on any other forum, your pointless bulls**t alone would have earned you a banning long ago. Fortunately for you, and unfortunately for us, the moderators here are much kinder to the mentally shortchanged.
Every time you hit that 'post' button, you bring shame onto the memory of the people that died that day. Your every worthless word does nothing to advance any sort of truth, whatever that truth may end up being, and rather, harms it a great deal. You are a nasty, pointless, rhetorical piece of work whom I can only assume the idea of an independent thought is so foreign to as to cause sickness.
You have no interest in any truth. Or rather, any truth that doesn't fit your preset notions. You have no interest in rational debate, in posting anything of any worth whatsoever, and were it up to me, your a** would've been out the door LONG ago. Banning you would not stifle debate; it would just make pages load faster.
_________________ The truth won't set you free, but identifying the liars could help make the world a better place.
I feel bad for the guy and dont like to poke fun at people as I think it speaks volumes about ones own self esteem but whew!talk about advertise your insincerity ...man
If this is the best the shills can deliver then they are doing at least as good a job as anyone of exposing their true colours to all. _________________ Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut, that held its ground.
David Icke
the guy in this video says something along the lines of "using real planes is risky, because real planes leave real evidence"
what the.......
i always thought leaving false evidence was more risky myself, which is what would of been needed to pull of a npt scenerio, therefore the most risky scenerio is being passed of as the least risky scenerio, but there we go. obviously theres no keeping up with npt logic
"Still no reply from the NPT cheerleaders to this thread "
I've tried to reply to this thread but my attachment picture wouldn't show up. I wrote to the administrator for assistance some time ago and am still waiting for direction.
My main point (and had I been able to attach my google snip, it would be clear) is that somebody has taken the google earth view that Teresa has from her office, but they have taken the wrong view. Their view is a "hovering well above Theresa's building" view. The view Theresa would actually have from her building is far less grand. I had, of course, taken a snip pic from google earth to display this very very very very important detail, but as I can't attach it, you'll all just have to go and have a look on google earth yourselves.
I've also heard what she says. I'm well impressed she could see the plane from so far away with a rather more obscured view than you'd all have us believe. I don't deny she could see the towers, but even with the camera, zoomed in on the building the journos didn't see it, and really really had to look really hard at their own footage. No way did she see the plane from there. And if she did, why use the word "another" after literally seconds earlier saying you didn't know what caused the explosion in the first tower? Not buying that, sorry.
All in all, this evidence is totally inconsequential when stacked alongside the mountains of stronger and very pointed evidence that this was a false flag attack. Since attempting to debunk my sister when she called with her "inside job" news, I have continued to find more and more and more compelling evidence all leading to the very ugly truth. I literally couldn't debunk her. She was right. And even when I tried to debunk the stuff I wasn't sure about through the official debunking sites, I found that the official debunking sites don't actually tackle most of the conspiracy theory stuff. They just bandy around the edges debunking the really way out ideas that nobody really believes anyway (like that "pod" business!), but anything that has substance - not a peep! Well, you can't debunk it when it's swept under the mat. Why avoid it? Because it can't be debunk, probably, because it's true!
Anyway, point is, anybody who bothers to research this comes to the same conclusion - false flag attack, all roads lead to Bush Admin. I'm yet to find anybody in support of the official story who doesn't cry "treason" at anybody who asks questions (blind dumb loyalty???). I'm yet to find anybody in support of the official story who is open to debating or even discussing alternate views (terrible science). I'm yet to find anybody in support of the official story who has brought to the fore really compelling evidence that supports the official story.
You see, the truthers, including the NPT people (of which I am not necessarily one - I seek the truth, whatever that may be. I have no agenda) are all looking for a theory that fits the evidence. At times this means bandying a few ideas around, weird as they may sound. Ideas that are probably pretty easy to debunk. It's easy to attack alternate theories for this reason - because we are trying to find the theory that fits the evidence, and by the very nature of that, it's going to mean lots of theories busted and dead ends.
On the other hand, we have the official story. One I can debunk myself at almost every turn. It's indefensible. It doesn't fit the evidence which means it is impossible. There can only be two reasons to defend a story like that:
1) You're either too dumb or too lazy or to research the facts yourself thus believe what the television preaches at you as gospel, which you will defend as gospel (I heard one defender of the official story accuse a truther of blasphemy for questioning the official story. "BLASPHEMY"! Can you believe that? Who died and made the Bush Admin God??? What a laugh!)
0r, 2) You're a plant.
That's my two cents, but I'll probably lose my account on this site now, because I am here with only one agenda - to find the truth, no matter where it leads.
I'll try one last time to attach my google earth snip to this, but I don't expect it to post...
...wooooh! It posted! How stoked am I!!!! can someone put the towers in???
111 8th Ave, chelsea.JPG
Description:
real view from Therea's window - minus towers. Another clever dude can put them in.
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2007 11:33 pm Post subject:
The way I see it jo is theres no noise in this section if NPT supporters arnt making it
By all means go for it if you want a space when you can lay out your ideas in a way that facilitates people giving them some consideration: if you can manifest it, and isnt combative or aggresive on the NPT sid, I WILL protect it: thats a promise
I feel passions have cooled a bit now its winter and we have many other matters to focus our attention on, so theres not much need for argument if no-one wants to argue and this section could indeed be at least mind opening even if considered mostly an exercise in imagination, and that is a significant positive possibility to be worth some thought, I would hope _________________ Free your Self and Free the World
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:22 pm Post subject:
marky 54 wrote:
gareth wrote:
You can watch Fetzer get emotional about Ace Baker and September Clues from about 45 minutes into the video below.
the guy in this video says something along the lines of "using real planes is risky, because real planes leave real evidence"
what the.......
i always thought leaving false evidence was more risky myself, which is what would of been needed to pull of a npt scenerio, therefore the most risky scenerio is being passed of as the least risky scenerio, but there we go. obviously theres no keeping up with npt logic
Yea - the words 'logic' and 'NPT' don't really belong in the same paragraph, let alone sentence.
The guy in the video is the infamous Arse Baker.
I must admit after watching the attempt using a 12year old's 'geometry' to attempt to calculate a position in 3-D space, followed by attempting to suugest there was something 'fishy' about Bob & Bri's well known video pause until after the second strike, followed by another misleading attempt to demonstrate 'pixel overlap but using a high contrast bright white building edge to completely negate the point of the WTC example (low contrast, low colour definition) original, I'd seen all I needed to see of his fact-lite presentation and fast forwarded to the Fetzerama portion.
I remember at the LA 2006 symposium thinking afterwards that in the midst of the professionals with their cool and informative presentations - even Bowman could be passionate while still retaining dignity, here was this Fetzer buffoon busking like crazy and practically shaking with the self-perceived power of his rant - and what an embarrassment he was.
Well, he certainly outdid himself in that vid - and how.
If there were ever any doubts as to his loyalty to 'truth', that 'presentation' surely laid them to rest for any discriminating viewer still weighed down by benefit of the doubt.
What a *. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Wed Dec 19, 2007 11:36 pm Post subject:
jo wrote:
"Still no reply from the NPT cheerleaders to this thread "
I've tried to reply to this thread but my attachment picture wouldn't show up. I wrote to the administrator for assistance some time ago and am still waiting for direction.
My main point (and had I been able to attach my google snip, it would be clear) is that somebody has taken the google earth view that Teresa has from her office, but they have taken the wrong view. Their view is a "hovering well above Theresa's building" view. The view Theresa would actually have from her building is far less grand. I had, of course, taken a snip pic from google earth to display this very very very very important detail, but as I can't attach it, you'll all just have to go and have a look on google earth yourselves.
I've also heard what she says. I'm well impressed she could see the plane from so far away with a rather more obscured view than you'd all have us believe. I don't deny she could see the towers, but even with the camera, zoomed in on the building the journos didn't see it, and really really had to look really hard at their own footage. No way did she see the plane from there. And if she did, why use the word "another" after literally seconds earlier saying you didn't know what caused the explosion in the first tower? Not buying that, sorry.
All in all, this evidence is totally inconsequential when stacked alongside the mountains of stronger and very pointed evidence that this was a false flag attack. Since attempting to debunk my sister when she called with her "inside job" news, I have continued to find more and more and more compelling evidence all leading to the very ugly truth. I literally couldn't debunk her. She was right. And even when I tried to debunk the stuff I wasn't sure about through the official debunking sites, I found that the official debunking sites don't actually tackle most of the conspiracy theory stuff. They just bandy around the edges debunking the really way out ideas that nobody really believes anyway (like that "pod" business!), but anything that has substance - not a peep! Well, you can't debunk it when it's swept under the mat. Why avoid it? Because it can't be debunk, probably, because it's true!
Anyway, point is, anybody who bothers to research this comes to the same conclusion - false flag attack, all roads lead to Bush Admin. I'm yet to find anybody in support of the official story who doesn't cry "treason" at anybody who asks questions (blind dumb loyalty???). I'm yet to find anybody in support of the official story who is open to debating or even discussing alternate views (terrible science). I'm yet to find anybody in support of the official story who has brought to the fore really compelling evidence that supports the official story.
You see, the truthers, including the NPT people (of which I am not necessarily one - I seek the truth, whatever that may be. I have no agenda) are all looking for a theory that fits the evidence. At times this means bandying a few ideas around, weird as they may sound. Ideas that are probably pretty easy to debunk. It's easy to attack alternate theories for this reason - because we are trying to find the theory that fits the evidence, and by the very nature of that, it's going to mean lots of theories busted and dead ends.
On the other hand, we have the official story. One I can debunk myself at almost every turn. It's indefensible. It doesn't fit the evidence which means it is impossible. There can only be two reasons to defend a story like that:
1) You're either too dumb or too lazy or to research the facts yourself thus believe what the television preaches at you as gospel, which you will defend as gospel (I heard one defender of the official story accuse a truther of blasphemy for questioning the official story. "BLASPHEMY"! Can you believe that? Who died and made the Bush Admin God??? What a laugh!)
0r, 2) You're a plant.
That's my two cents, but I'll probably lose my account on this site now, because I am here with only one agenda - to find the truth, no matter where it leads.
I'll try one last time to attach my google earth snip to this, but I don't expect it to post...
...wooooh! It posted! How stoked am I!!!! can someone put the towers in???
The two substantive points in your post are that the google view is the wrong altitude - and yet it can clearly be seen that the Towers are visible in the gap in the skyline, and being from a lower altitude also shows that she would have a light sky background to see the incoming plane contrasted against
The other is that video definition is comparable to human eyesight - which would depend on knowing more about her opthalmist's report on her. 20/20 vision for instance would be far clearer than any NTSC 525 line, 4x3 ratio electronic picture.
It's interesting (but not surprising) that you are prepared to doubt that without any evidence it is the case, purely because of your belief that the planes were 'fake' so she must be lieing. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's interesting (but not surprising) that you are prepared to doubt that without any evidence it is the case, purely because of your belief that the planes were 'fake' so she must be lieing.[/quote]
Thanks for your reply, chek. Firstly, though, I want to make really clear that I have no agenda re:NPT. I haven't made up my mind, basically because I'm finding it hard to find substantial evidence either way. So much disinformation out there.
Theresa for example, and the very obviously wrong google earth "view" from her building being the wrong altitude, with a spiel about how she could so clearly see the towers. In actual fact, it's not so clear, as we can see from my closer to the truth (but still not accurate b/c we have no idea where she actually was in the building) view. Who knows if she saw it. There's a pic of the view of the towers from the building in question - on their homepage. The sun is creating a huge glare. We could speculate whether there'd be similar glare in the morning. I'll never know. I'm on the other side of the world. So I have to rely a lot on what I can find out from people there. Most of which is unreliable because everyone wants their evidence to fit their agenda.
There are things that really puzzle me, though, like the entry hole (I won't call it a cardboard cut!). On the NIST report of, I think, the second plane (?). The wingtip on the right side has cleary cut through the vertical steel. That troubles me. Especially as lower down the horizontal steel is not cut through. I'm no expert, but it just doesn't seem right. That coupled with the complete disintegration of the plane once it had made its impressive entry. Something's not quite right, and nobody has given an adequate explanation - that I've seen...yet. That's not to say there isn't one.
Also, if the fire was so hot as to disintegrate a plane, how is the woman standing in the hole (you know the pic - everyone knows the pic) not dead? Maybe there's an explanation there, too, but as previously, I've not heard an adequate one.
Then there's the footage. Sure there's all these vids on tv fakery. So I tried to debunk them myself by checking out the archives from the actual news stations in question and seeing if the footage was tampered with (to fit an agenda). But I can't find any news station showing any archives of "live" footage. Only footage of vids that came in later. This was a very big surprise. The biggest media shots of the modern world... just not there? Again, mabe they are, and I haven't found them. I'm open to that, also.
Then there's the BBC's lost footage which they openly admitted was "lost". Said it was accidental. Again, biggest media shot in the modern world, accidentally lost? I doubt that! Their footage was of WTC7, but undeniably similar media discrepencies.
So these are a few of my questions, leaving me with the lingering feeling that the NPT crowd are maybe onto something. It's pretty clear something went IN. As far as I'm concerned, though, WHAT went in is still open to specualtion!
If you can walk me through your thoughts on these things, I would be more than happy to consider your point of view. As I said, I don't have an agenda. I just need the evidence to fit something, and whatever that something is I will accept as "the most probable event given the evidence". Of course, I will never KNOW, unless the perps fess up!
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 12:21 pm Post subject:
jo wrote:
Theresa for example, and the very obviously wrong google earth "view" from her building being the wrong altitude, with a spiel about how she could so clearly see the towers. In actual fact, it's not so clear, as we can see from my closer to the truth (but still not accurate b/c we have no idea where she actually was in the building) view. Who knows if she saw it.
Well she said she did, so without some valid reason to doubt that, I'll go with her statement.
jo wrote:
There's a pic of the view of the towers from the building in question - on their homepage. The sun is creating a huge glare. We could speculate whether there'd be similar glare in the morning. I'll never know. I'm on the other side of the world. So I have to rely a lot on what I can find out from people there. Most of which is unreliable because everyone wants their evidence to fit their agenda.
Glare is usually exaggerated photographically, and isn't necessarily what would actually be seen 'in the flesh'. Plus she'd be viewing to a south westerly direction, whereas the sun in the morning is to the east. The photo you've seen was most likely taken in the afternoon.
jo wrote:
There are things that really puzzle me, though, like the entry hole (I won't call it a cardboard cut!). On the NIST report of, I think, the second plane (?). The wingtip on the right side has cleary cut through the vertical steel. That troubles me. Especially as lower down the horizontal steel is not cut through. I'm no expert, but it just doesn't seem right.
What troubles me is that there are no precedents for collisions of the type seen at the WTC, and yet there are the strangest expectations for what should have happened.
The link below has some photos showing what was cut and what was snapped at the joins and battered out of the way. It's worth looking closely and noticing that where the aluminium facings appear to be cut, often they still have dark rusty steel columns discernible behind them.
That coupled with the complete disintegration of the plane once it had made its impressive entry. Something's not quite right, and nobody has given an adequate explanation - that I've seen...yet. That's not to say there isn't one.
The kinetic energy of 3.4 million KJ is a lot of force to soak up, and the MIT (Wierzbicki) calculated that only 4% of that was required to enter the building, leaving the rest to be somehow dissipated. Shredding the plane and some of the floor joists and main core columns seems as likely an explanation as any.
jo wrote:
Also, if the fire was so hot as to disintegrate a plane, how is the woman standing in the hole (you know the pic - everyone knows the pic) not dead? Maybe there's an explanation there, too, but as previously, I've not heard an adequate one.
The most likely explanations are that the heat of the fires was somewhat exaggerated to account for the 'steel weakening theory' according to the Official non-explosive theory, and that the survivors seen (like the famous 'woman on the edge' photo (although there's actually a group if you look closely) were shielded by being on the other side of the core structure during the impact and initial fires.
jo wrote:
Then there's the footage. Sure there's all these vids on tv fakery. So I tried to debunk them myself by checking out the archives from the actual news stations in question and seeing if the footage was tampered with (to fit an agenda). But I can't find any news station showing any archives of "live" footage. Only footage of vids that came in later. This was a very big surprise. The biggest media shots of the modern world... just not there? Again, mabe they are, and I haven't found them. I'm open to that, also.
The explanation is very simple really - all the media cameras were round the North side taking photos of the attack that had already happened - that was where the action was.
Nobody was expecting a second strike which came in from the opposite direction afterwards. It wasn't until later that Taylor and Herzakhani's tourist shots from the waterfront south of the WTC became available.
jo wrote:
Then there's the BBC's lost footage which they openly admitted was "lost". Said it was accidental. Again, biggest media shot in the modern world, accidentally lost? I doubt that! Their footage was of WTC7, but undeniably similar media discrepencies.
Their 'lost' advance announcement of the WTC7 collapse is indeed strange.
jo wrote:
So these are a few of my questions, leaving me with the lingering feeling that the NPT crowd are maybe onto something. It's pretty clear something went IN. As far as I'm concerned, though, WHAT went in is still open to specualtion!
The NPT crowd have said they've been on to something for a long time, but apart from endless innuendo, misinformation, outright disinformation and accusing anybody who doesn't buy their theories of being complicit shills, still have nothing to show for it.
NPT is for common or garden paranoids and hobby conspiracists, in my opinion. Just check out 911 Movement's demographic for confirmation of that. But each to their own.
jo wrote:
Of course, I will never KNOW, unless the perps fess up!
Luckily, relying on confession isn't the only means of solving most crimes - though it would be nice. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
3.4 million kj which would also be the destructive energy exerted partly on its own destruction AS IT ENTERS THE BUILDING.
We all agree (i think) that the administration is to blame why would they employ hi-jackers to do a job that could be better orchestrated by a director with the ability to manipulate time to live pictures. why would they allow hi-jackers the chance of being overpowered by other passengers and not making it. why would they plant a passport in new york and a shemagh in shanksville both in pristine condition even though nothing else survives (its easy to spot a plant). i believe nothing anyone tells me to believe because its done for a reason period. if the story stood up on its own why design evidence?. 3.4m/kj is fine in unobstructed flight but put so much as a telegraph pole in its way and its a score draw with confetti everywhere. a passport survives but not one single identifiable part with the correct service number on it. this event was the new pearl harbour america so badly wanted and needed setup by israeli/british/american black ops teams to ensure the long awaited foot hold in the middle east. it could not be allowed to fail and the chances of a positive result are to control all the variables as much as possible, leave nothing to chance. leaving no physical evidence how else would it be achieved. _________________ wheres the popular peoples front...hes over there
SPLITTER!!
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 11:39 pm Post subject: plane obvious
tomsk
Hi tomsk,
well said. The magic, aluminium, steel and concrete slicing fairy blades which were mounted hurriedly onto the fearful flights instead of the regular fragile wings - are what dunnit. S'obvious innit?
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:55 am Post subject: Re: plane obvious
alwun wrote:
tomsk
Hi tomsk,
well said. The magic, aluminium, steel and concrete slicing fairy blades which were mounted hurriedly onto the fearful flights instead of the regular fragile wings - are what dunnit. S'obvious innit?
cheers Al..
Al, in what fairy universe is a 90 ton wing assembly, built to take the stresses of airspeeds up to three times that of a hurricane and full of incompressible liquid fuel, classed as 'fragile'? _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:24 am Post subject:
tomsk wrote:
3.4 million kj which would also be the destructive energy exerted partly on its own destruction AS IT ENTERS THE BUILDING.
Exactly so, but also with the debris of the plane and outer columns continuing a path of destruction within the building until their energy is expended.
tomsk wrote:
We all agree (i think) that the administration is to blame
To be more specific, we probably all agree that elements both within and without the US Government have been reasonably shown to be complicit by both action and inaction.
tomsk wrote:
why would they employ hi-jackers to do a job that could be better orchestrated by a director with the ability to manipulate time to live pictures. why would they allow hi-jackers the chance of being overpowered by other passengers and not making it. why would they plant a passport in new york and a shemagh in shanksville both in pristine condition even though nothing else survives (its easy to spot a plant).
Sorry, this "why would they" stuff is Killtown territory, and as such is just an invitation to speculate, which is usually based on limited evidence and understanding.
tomsk wrote:
i believe nothing anyone tells me to believe because its done for a reason period. if the story stood up on its own why design evidence?.
I take it by 'design' evidence you mean why plant evidence?
To further implicate the Saudi hijackers, I'd speculate.
tomsk wrote:
3.4m/kj is fine in unobstructed flight but put so much as a telegraph pole in its way and its a score draw with confetti everywhere.
Really? I think the pole mass v aircraft mass times kinetic energy equation wouldn't favour the telegraph pole very highly.
tomsk wrote:
a passport survives but not one single identifiable part with the correct service number on it.
The most interesting thing about the miraculously surviving found passport (apart from its survival) is who found it. (You might like to look into that).
And identifiable aircraft parts have been found and recovered, but the USG - specifically the FBI - is stonewalling attempts to positively ID the wreckage. No doubt for all too obvious reasons.
tomsk wrote:
this event was the new pearl harbour america so badly wanted and needed setup by israeli/british/american black ops teams to ensure the long awaited foot hold in the middle east.
That is pretty much the current general speculation.
tomsk wrote:
it could not be allowed to fail and the chances of a positive result are to control all the variables as much as possible, leave nothing to chance. leaving no physical evidence how else would it be achieved.
If the current general speculation is in the ballpark area of correct, it didn't fail and we're already five years into a neverending war.
Still, I'm not sure what any of the above has to do with a thread on the fraudster "Simon Shack's" fraudulent 'evidence' video. But thanks for bumping the thread. _________________ Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
tomsk, you really should read the entirety of a thread before you necropost. _________________ "What about a dance club that only let in deaf people? It would really only need flashing lights, so they'd save a lot of money on music." - Dresden Codak
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
