When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Please show me the post where I said there was no damage .
Yes I doubt the report that says there was because of the lack of photos of it , like I said why aren't there hundreds showing the damage and fires
Yes there is smoke
The point I'm making is the lack of photos and videos of the buildings damage and fires , that's it
I've said time and again none of this proves anything , in other words I don't know what the truth is ,
Second paragraph and see the pictures above, they're not new you were looking on sites that don't want you to see them.
What proof do you want? There were no explosives, the building was on fire, had a 20 story hole in it and a two buildings weighing millions of tons pounded the ground next to it. It fell down, why does that need any more proof.
agreed, and something you have in common with the OP
but all the line of evidence from multiple sources points to the earth being round and WT7 being fatally damaged by fires and debris and succumbing to a gravity led collapse
anything is possible, but that fails as a scientific hypothesis without evidence
You missed the point of the pictures , I was asked what I'd like as proof , I showed examples of building fires to demonstrate what I expect the fully involved fire at wtc to look like, we all know it never looked anything like those fires , or there would be pictures , I find it difficult to imagine what the fires must of been like to cause such damage but remain out of sight
I showed you a page where you can find out why you didn't see fire like you showed in the pictures, it's very well explained. Take a quick look up at your pictures if you can't be bothered to read, the outside of the building is on fire.
Most of the eyewitneses were fire fighters and most described it as, the building was fully involved in fire , something like that , it's obviously firefighter talk , I'd just liked to have seen how that looked , I'm guessing the reporters were there alongside the fire fighters up to the point it was clear it was going to collapse , so pictures or videos of that moment would be good to see
I showed you a page where you can find out why you didn't see fire like you showed in the pictures, it's very well explained. Take a quick look up at your pictures if you can't be bothered to read, the outside of the building is on fire.
Yes I read that , so the wtc7 fire stayed far enough away from the Windows , okay , that makes sense
the problem with all conspiracy theorists and science deniers is that they ultimately take the view that unless THEY are personally convinced - to THEIR satisfaction then it is all a hoax
so 911 twoothers want it all proved by "models" however the basic physics of the Square-cube law, amongst other things, determines that this is not possible
anti-evolutionists want to see a monkey giving birth to a human - again wont happen
climate change/science deniers want to release a molecule of C02 into the atmosphere and then run to a thermometer and record a temperature rise
the above "impossible proof" complete with a basic misunderstanding of the underlying science and it is a toxic mix
the problem with all conspiracy theorists and science deniers is that they ultimately take the view that unless THEY are personally convinced - to THEIR satisfaction then it is all a hoax
so 911 twoothers want it all proved by "models" however the basic physics of the Square-cube law, amongst other things, determines that this is not possible
anti-evolutionists want to see a monkey giving birth to a human - again wont happen
climate change/science deniers want to release a molecule of C02 into the atmosphere and then run to a thermometer and record a temperature rise
the above "impossible proof" complete with a basic misunderstanding of the underlying science and it is a toxic mix
I read the first line and thought blah blah blah , bored of hearing it
If the earth was flat, I think we'd know. And if it was, why would it be a secret? Incase we all decided to sail to the edge to see what's over the edge, and tip the place over?
If the earth was flat, I think we'd know. And if it was, why would it be a secret? Incase we all decided to sail to the edge to see what's over the edge, and tip the place over?
Nah, it wouldn't tip over unless everyone lined up on one edge and jumped up and down in unison. Then we'd really be in trouble
If the earth was flat, I think we'd know. And if it was, why would it be a secret? Incase we all decided to sail to the edge to see what's over the edge, and tip the place over?
Ask Gary, he's got all the answers and isn't looking for proof. Then again, he wants us to all go and look for the answers....wait....what ...as mentioned above, never argue with a fool
Ask Gary, he's got all the answers and isn't looking for proof. Then again, he wants us to all go and look for the answers....wait....what ...as mentioned above, never argue with a fool
if people haven't read the thread that might actually be believed , tosser
Just watched the video with the Orange glowy bits coming out the Windows , I've seen the pictures of that exact scene , I wonder how long before it collapsed that they were taken , how much worse did it get
if people haven't read the thread that might actually be believed , tosser
Hahaha! You are a riot! That makes zero sense in response to my post. Not a lot rattling around in there alongside the conspiracy theories, is there? You're a wee treasure, aren't you.
Hahaha! You are a riot! That makes zero sense in response to my post. Not a lot rattling around in there alongside the conspiracy theories, is there? You're a wee treasure, aren't you.
Okay , so what answers have I given to what questions ? and proof of what ? What did I say that needs proof ? And what do I want you to find the answer to?
Your comment about me paints a picture of somebody that thinks they know the truth and that the truth is far fetched and based on facts I have given no proof of .
What I've actually been doing is trying to have a conversation about a couple of the unusual circumstances ,
I could have a conversation about the no plane theory , would that mean I believe it to be a fact ?
I could have the discussion on the side of the no planers but it would really only be playing devils advocate , unfortunately the conversation would end with ridicule and people claiming that I believe it to be true
I don't think I'm the one that has lost sight of the original thread theme.
For me the theme of the thread was outlandish claims , it was a bit of fun to start with, I did attempt to get a few discussions going it made me laugh at some points , I also wanted to see how many pages this could stretch to
07 April 2016, 04:28 PM
...as mentioned above, never argue with a fool 