Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 9/30/10 10:03 PM, Jedi-Master wrote:

At 9/30/10 08:26 PM, Gunner-D wrote:

At 9/20/10 03:40 AM, RightWingGamer wrote: I've been on NG for quite a bit, and it looks like everyone here (at least in the politics board) has one thing in common:

None of us believes in conspiracy theories.

All of you are idiots and this is why I hate the politics forum.

So says the person with a simply atrocious username.

That is my name. It is ethnic Scandinavian you idiot.

If you are such a Jedi Master, which you are not because you lack significant brain power, then you would be able to debunk this one...

BUILDING 7

There have been a couple of real life conspiracies, like how John Wilkes Booth conspired with other people to assassinate Abraham Lincoln. That was found out right away. While conspiracies are in fact real, nearly all of them have been discovered shortly after they went through (or failed in some way). The idea of a conspiracy being able to hold so long without being exposed (especially in modern times) is simply ridiculous.

At 10/1/10 09:33 AM, Ericho wrote: There have been a couple of real life conspiracies, like how John Wilkes Booth conspired with other people to assassinate Abraham Lincoln. That was found out right away. While conspiracies are in fact real, nearly all of them have been discovered shortly after they went through (or failed in some way). The idea of a conspiracy being able to hold so long without being exposed (especially in modern times) is simply ridiculous.

According to the official story, 9-11 was a conspiracy of Islamic terrorists in coordination with bin Laden. This was found out shortly after if went through.

I'm sure if there is a group plotting 'world domination bwahaha', if they do achieve that goal, they wouldn't care if anyone knows about the conspiracy, who they are and their motives... because they already dominate the world!

At 10/1/10 09:22 AM, Gunner-D wrote:

At 9/30/10 10:03 PM, Jedi-Master wrote:

At 9/30/10 08:26 PM, Gunner-D wrote:

At 9/20/10 03:40 AM, RightWingGamer wrote: I've been on NG for quite a bit, and it looks like everyone here (at least in the politics board) has one thing in common:

None of us believes in conspiracy theories.

All of you are idiots and this is why I hate the politics forum.

So says the person with a simply atrocious username.

That is my name. It is ethnic Scandinavian you idiot.

If you are such a Jedi Master, which you are not because you lack significant brain power, then you would be able to debunk this one...

BUILDING 7

Master Yoda is away at the moment, so it's my job to set you conspiracy nuts straight for the moment.

Building 7 was peppered with debris when the towers collapsed, and it doesn't take a genius to know that so many large pieces of debris destroying so many floors of the tower was more than enough to cause its collapse.

I'm a skeptic, homewever conspiracy is a hard thing to proove as a God existance, I don't believe on conspiracy too and I will still to don't believe, unless if it be prooved I'll believe but as I said, proove something like this looks impossible. Someone can tell me a what which could turn this possible (if have one)?

At 10/1/10 11:19 PM, Jedi-Master wrote: Oh, and thanks for debunking the Building 7 argument RightWingGamer. :)

You're Welcome! But reinforcements are always appreciated. :)

At 10/1/10 11:32 PM, Jedi-Master wrote:

At 10/1/10 11:26 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 10/1/10 11:19 PM, Jedi-Master wrote: Oh, and thanks for debunking the Building 7 argument RightWingGamer. :)

You're Welcome! But reinforcements are always appreciated. :)

I would help you in any other thread, but I'm not all too knowledgeable in debunking conspiracies. Also, I believe in a JFK assassination conspiracy theory, which would make it ironic for me to try and debunk conspiracies in this thread.

you mean that there WAS a second shooter (which qualifies as a maybe) or that the second shooter was a US government employee?

At 10/1/10 11:36 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 10/1/10 11:32 PM, Jedi-Master wrote:

At 10/1/10 11:26 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 10/1/10 11:19 PM, Jedi-Master wrote: Oh, and thanks for debunking the Building 7 argument RightWingGamer. :)

You're Welcome! But reinforcements are always appreciated. :)

I would help you in any other thread, but I'm not all too knowledgeable in debunking conspiracies. Also, I believe in a JFK assassination conspiracy theory, which would make it ironic for me to try and debunk conspiracies in this thread.

you mean that there WAS a second shooter (which qualifies as a maybe) or that the second shooter was a US government employee?

A well known one is that the Mafia had relations to Lee Harvey Oswald, who was killed by Jack Ruby to keep him silent. The motivation behind this conspiracy is that Kennedy sabotaged the Mafia's business in Cuba.

At 10/1/10 11:07 PM, RightWingGamer wrote: Building 7 was peppered with debris when the towers collapsed, and it doesn't take a genius to know that so many large pieces of debris destroying so many floors of the tower was more than enough to cause its collapse.

Actually the debris didn't knock out any of the floors of building 7. What caused it to collapse was a fire. The base of the structure was not as strong as a regular tower of its size because of the way it was placed on top of the existing building below. This unconventional base caused the fire's effect on the structure's satibility to magnify. There was a possibility that the building could have been saved if it had had a normal structure.

At 10/2/10 12:11 AM, Camarohusky wrote: Actually the debris didn't knock out any of the floors of building 7. What caused it to collapse was a fire.

But what started the fire?

At 10/2/10 12:14 AM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 10/2/10 12:11 AM, Camarohusky wrote: Actually the debris didn't knock out any of the floors of building 7. What caused it to collapse was a fire.

But what started the fire?

I wasn't denying that debris and the WTC collapse caused building 7. I was just clarifying how it did.

At 10/2/10 12:17 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 10/2/10 12:14 AM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 10/2/10 12:11 AM, Camarohusky wrote: Actually the debris didn't knock out any of the floors of building 7. What caused it to collapse was a fire.

But what started the fire?

I wasn't denying that debris and the WTC collapse caused building 7. I was just clarifying how it did.

ah, so the debris started the fire. i see. Well, it looks like that's one more internet debater who will have a much easier time defeating a twoofer.

At 10/1/10 11:19 PM, Jedi-Master wrote: pretty much all of us who engage in discussion here are intellectuals, or at the very least, knowledgeable people. It appears that you are an exception, lol.

So be it.

Building 7 fell at freefall speed, like a controlled demolition.

At 10/2/10 12:14 AM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 10/2/10 12:11 AM, Camarohusky wrote: Actually the debris didn't knock out any of the floors of building 7. What caused it to collapse was a fire.

But what started the fire?

Yeah, what started the fire? What fuel source sustained the fire? Was it hot enough to warp steel (and warp it evenly between the 4 corners of the building in order to cause complete structural failure in the form of freefall collapse)? And remember, this building was the federal government's headquarters in New York City (home to the FBI, CIA, etc), so it couldn't have been too weak of a building.

Don't call me a truther, call me a reasonable doubter.

NIST and FEMA have both conducted investigations with help from half a dozen engineer organisations.

Basically it goes like this:
Big ass buildings go down.
Debris smacks the WTC7 causing damage especially a 10 story gash starting on the 8h floor.
This causes very small pockets of fire.
The shitty manually operated sprinkler system doesn't get switched on and the water pressure plummets.
Fires get worse.
Fire crews try to put out the fires but evacuate due to the building loosing structural integrity.
The building goes down.
The end.

Now that's over with, when someone finds evidence of explosive material, or aliens or a midget in a suit case then the conspiracy that santa claus or whoever else did it holds no merit.

But hey, whack jobs have better insight to engineering than engineers...right?

Niels Harrit and 8 other scientists found nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Center. He is interviewed on danish TV2 News.

He is interviewed on danish TV2 News.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_
3o

Its so funny how you say whack jobs and give labels to people who critically think about events like this. Its like you are discouraging independent thought.

Barry Jennings hearing explosions below him in WTC7

At 10/1/10 09:45 AM, Gunner-D wrote: According to the official story, 9-11 was a conspiracy of Islamic terrorists in coordination with bin Laden. This was found out shortly after if went through.

Good point. I recall an episode of Penn & Teller's Bullsh*t show where they talked about conspiracy theories. The stuff they did on 911 conspiracy theories is truly some of their best work. They ended that part of the episode by simply saying that 911 was a conspiracy enough and people did not have to make stuff up.

Your right or wrong logic shouldn't be applied to these things. For users who announce that it is wrong and claim and you don't even know anything about it shows what you really are. Then asking another sci-fi expert to debunk it. What do they know?

Debunk this one..

The elite gather in California to "cremate care" in a Satanist ritual every summer and drug chemist Alexander Shulgin is on the guest list to provide the "party favours"

At 10/2/10 08:45 AM, Gunner-D wrote: Building 7 fell at freefall speed, like a controlled demolition.

That phrase alone is proof that you have no idea what you're talking about. If you're willing toa ctually get some facts for a change (and save me the trouble of dealing with this shit further on) just read this.

Right or Wrong?
This or That?
Wave or Particle?

the guest list

seems like a lot of "right wingers"

Are the homosexual acts they're subjected to meant to discredit conservatism?

so the elite can sell their snake oil socialism?

At 10/2/10 09:32 AM, Gunner-D wrote: Niels Harrit and 8 other scientists found nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Center. He is interviewed on danish TV2 News.

He is interviewed on danish TV2 News.

I like how at the end he implies there wasn't an investigation when I've already previously mentioned two.

He also mentions molten metal found.

He also claims that WTC7 collapsed in 6.5 seconds. That's bollocks. The collapse started with the penthouse and then moved to the north side wall. That took 18.2 seconds.

Here's a fun fact. Harrit's article was published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal. Sounds fancy right? Well coincidentally enough the people who run that site, wrote the paper! That article you're referring to has never been put under proper peer review and was just slapped on a 9/11 truther website.

Doesn't sound like the actions of a man who's been an academic since the early 70's.

He claims that Iron Oxide and Aluminium were found. But he doesn't talk much about how much was in it. Let's hope he does in the article because Iron Oxide is RUST.

At 10/2/10 09:34 AM, Gunner-D wrote: Its so funny how you say whack jobs and give labels to people who critically think about events like this. Its like you are discouraging independent thought.

I'm not discouraging any sort of thought because you need to think prior to being discouraged. 9/11 truthers are just like creationists. They get a conclusion in their heads and do everything they can to find something, anything to support it regardless of what anything or anyone else says. They're no different to psychics, faith healers or witch doctors.

At 10/2/10 09:32 AM, Gunner-D wrote: Niels Harrit and 8 other scientists found nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Center. He is interviewed on danish TV2 News.

He is interviewed on danish TV2 News.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_
3o

Wow. No shit there's thermite, when they were clearing the wreckage they used thermite

At 10/2/10 11:39 AM, JohnnyWang wrote:

At 10/2/10 08:45 AM, Gunner-D wrote: Building 7 fell at freefall speed, like a controlled demolition.

That phrase alone is proof that you have no idea what you're talking about. If you're willing toa ctually get some facts for a change (and save me the trouble of dealing with this shit further on) just read this.

I have no idea what I am talking about? I saw it happen, I watch the entire event unfold in real time on television at my school. There is also video. Check my link below.

At 10/2/10 01:24 PM, The-universe wrote: He also mentions molten metal found.

Nano-thermite is different than thermite. The facts here don't have much substance to my claim of traces of and byproducts of nanothermite being found in the area.

He also claims that WTC7 collapsed in 6.5 seconds. That's bollocks. The collapse started with the penthouse and then moved to the north side wall. That took 18.2 seconds.

Funny, watch this an count the seconds... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Atbrn4k55 lA

9/11 truthers are just like creationists. They get a conclusion in their heads and do everything they can to find something, anything to support it regardless of what anything or anyone else says.

Well, according to your definition, I am not a truther. I haven't come to a conclusion. Maybe your definition of truther is flawed because many are calling for a public reinvestigation.

It seems to me you are the one with the conclusion and you support it at all costs, regardless of what anyone else says.

At 10/2/10 02:39 PM, Gunner-D wrote:

At 10/2/10 01:24 PM, The-universe wrote: He also mentions molten metal found.

Nano-thermite is different than thermite.

I never said it wasn't. However 9/11 conspiracy theorists claim it's either thermite or nanothermite,

The facts here don't have much substance to my claim of traces of and byproducts of nanothermite being found in the area.

Except the fact that A. you didn't actually address anything that I've said, just dismissed it. B. The same compounds that the make up of NanoThermite is naturally found in buildings. All they did was discover what was there, not how much there was.

Funny, watch this an count the seconds... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Atbrn4k55 lA

"This evidence supports the NIST contention that the building collapse progressed from the penthouse out as columns were weakened by the fires. The slow sinking of the penthouses, indicating the internal collapse of the building behind the visible north wall, took 8.2 seconds according to a NIST preliminary report. Seismograph trace of the collapse of WTC 7 indicates that parts of the building were hitting the ground for 18 seconds. This means the collapse took at least 18 seconds, of which only the last approximately 15 seconds are visible in videos: 8 seconds for the penthouses and 7 seconds for the north wall to come down."

We can do this all day.

Well, according to your definition, I am not a truther. I haven't come to a conclusion. Maybe your definition of truther is flawed because many are calling for a public reinvestigation.

Apart from the fact that all your posts and links in this thread are in support of 9/11 being an inside job.

It seems to me you are the one with the conclusion and you support it at all costs, regardless of what anyone else says.

That's funny because I was a 9/11 truther very briefly a few years ago.

I've already done these discussions, I've already seen the "alternative" explanations. I've already looked and searched and you know what I found? The same level of credibility as geocentricism.

I'm better off just posting the reports from the engineering groups and let you mull it over.

At 10/2/10 02:39 PM, Gunner-D wrote: I have no idea what I am talking about? I saw it happen, I watch the entire event unfold in real time on television at my school. There is also video. Check my link below.

I see the stars every night, doesn't mean I know how far away they are or what the physical processes in them are.

"Controlled demolition" is a buzzword for you truthers, which doesn't mean near what you think it means, and the whole collapse speed doesn't prove anything which way or the other. You're just repeating the crack science peddled by people who decided from the get go what they think about the case and ignore any proof against themselves.