Hurricane Erin 9/11 : Checking the Evidence

Stephen · Moderate Poster Joined: 03 Jul 2006 Posts: 819

Lee,

You carnt come on this forum and say people are playing ping pong with the truth movement when you have your bat out for at lest 4 forum posters on this thread alone.

Stephen · Moderate Poster Joined: 03 Jul 2006 Posts: 819

GodSaveTheTeam · Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 4:02 pm Post subject:

Stephen · Moderate Poster Joined: 03 Jul 2006 Posts: 819

Your seeing things different from me. Thats ok. But its all gone to far now even for me. As I keep saying we are just waisting energy.

You say wont trust anyone, but you do trust Steven E Jones,
David R. Giffin Richard Gage and freinds coz you are subcribing to there theory. IE planted bombs, wired explosive and thermate etc...
Heat at WTC, when you say there was no hot dust cloud.
Molten Metal, when the first responders were standing on top of GZ and were walking underneath in the basments?
Real Planes that cut through steel girders and can fly at 500 MPRH at sea level.
Thermate that cuts through steel core. But were are all the steel beams?
Large debrie pile that is consistant with over 220 storys more like 400 storys if you include the rest of the WTC complex.

I could go on but theres no point mate.

GodSaveTheTeam · Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:00 pm Post subject:

I suppose you're right. However disheartening that may be.

I dont personally believe Jones, Griffin et al. I have always questioned everything they've ever said and researched for myself their claims.

What I did believe was that at one point long ago now, we all believed that there was a strong body of evidence against the OCT and we all agreed that we should all do our best to share that same body of evidence with as many people as possible.

It was a "truth movement" and that would suggest finding the truth whatever that may be.

Now it seems we all have different evidence to show seperately to people. Including evidence against what once united us all.

That may still be effective in challenging the OCT.

But in my opinion, there comes a time when evidence must be discarded if it does not stand up to serious scrutiny.

I could list many reinforcements for the evidence you claim is bogus and much more to suggest why yours is bogus.

But you're right. Waste of time. People believe what they want to believe. Including those that believe the OCT.

Maybe we will never find the truth, just "this could have happened - maybe that happened" in the never ending pointless ping-pong ball game.

Pikey · Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:58 pm Post subject:

GodSaveTheTeam · Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:10 am Post subject:

Pikey · Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:18 pm Post subject:

GodSaveTheTeam · Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 1:24 pm Post subject:

Pikey · Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:06 pm Post subject:

GSTT I'm not ignoring your thread, in fact you confirm that Hurricane Erin was indeed present and relatively close to the twin towers site on 911.

Your debunking efforts do not convince me and imo Andrew Johnson's top quality research is credible. HAARP and DEW technology does exist and thats a fact.

Now please would you respond to the simple question I have raised.

flamesong · Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:44 pm Post subject:

GodSaveTheTeam · Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:31 pm Post subject:

Pikey · Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:50 pm Post subject:

GodSaveTheTeam · Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 9:10 am Post subject:

Pikey · Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 1:59 pm Post subject:

chek · Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:11 pm Post subject:

flamesong · Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:31 pm Post subject:

Two thoughts:

The first law of thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed

If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe
Carl Sagan

chek · Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:08 pm Post subject:

flamesong · Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:01 pm Post subject:

flamesong · Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:02 pm Post subject:

Andrew. · Validated Poster Joined: 27 Nov 2007 Posts: 1518

Andrew Johnson

I made the post below on a new Thread in "Controversies". Sadly, one of the moderators moved it to the Bin. So, it seems the truth seekers here want to deny admission of a mistake and a "right of reply". Wow.

==========

Lee Woudberg recently posted a YouTube video

Link

in response to my earlier video

Link

I have to commend Lee on finding a mistake in my video in that Thermite IS (sort of) mentioned in Jones' RFC - the word is in a link to his paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?"

http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/Why%20Indeed%20Did%20the%2 0WTC%20Buildings%20Completely%20Collapse%20Jones%20Thermite%20World%20 Trade%20Center%20J24.pdf

and I had indeed missed this (it wasn't a deliberate error on my part) . It goes to show that everyone should indeed, "check the evidence" to find errors. I provided links on the YouTube video to enable people to do just that.

Having said that, does this mean that Thermite destroyed the WTC? What does Lee Woudberg think? (I posted 2 or 3 comments on his video).

I have posted further thoughts on this blog, some of which are included below.

http://911thermitefree.blogspot.com/2009/11/thermite-paper-has-disclai mer-and-was.html

e.g. Thermite Paper has a disclaimer and was updated in Jan 2007. "The views in this paper are the sole responsibility of the author." Amazing. Does that imply that the co-submitters on the RFC DO NOT support Jones' connclusions?

So come on folks, what turned those cars upside down and levitated those people etc etc - what's YOUR explanation. Can Lee do us a video EXPLAINING WHAT DID IT? Thanks!

Again, thanks to Lee for checking the evidence and allowing me to find further points on interest in Jones' "paper".

GodSaveTheTeam · Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:28 am Post subject:

Now how about checking the Erin evidence Mr Johnson?

GodSaveTheTeam · Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:15 am Post subject:

Pikey · Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 3:47 pm Post subject:

GodSaveTheTeam · Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:15 pm Post subject:

flamesong · Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 4:59 pm Post subject:

*For information only*

Wikipedia:

Troll
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[2]

gruts · Major Poster Joined: 28 Apr 2007 Posts: 1050

Isn't it amazing how andrew johnson has nothing to say about the evidence that disproves his Hurricane Erin garbage? he is fully aware that this thread has been here for months but refuses to address this evidence.

you'd think that if he had any integrity or credibility he would do so.

I wonder why he won't?

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Controversies	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2