Poll

What is the truth about the 911 attack on the World Trade Center?

Hijacked Planes were flown into the two towers.  Resulting fires caused the collapse.
14 (60.9%)
The planes were CGI and it was controlled demolition
2 (8.7%)
Something other than planes were flown into the twin towers,  missiles drones etc.
2 (8.7%)
The planes were holographic projections from a special satellite, and it was a directed energy weapon
1 (4.3%)
Something else.
3 (13%)
Denspressure
1 (4.3%)

Total Members Voted: 23

Voting closed: March 06, 2017, 10:56:40 PM

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 97 98 [99] 100 101 ... 229   Go Down

911 What is the truth?

  • 6864 Replies
  • 1198717 Views
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2940 on: March 28, 2017, 02:29:11 AM »
Quote from: Rayzor on March 28, 2017, 02:28:03 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:26:09 AM
So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?

My position is that you are an idiot.   I suspect you are about to confirm it for me.

Please answer the question.

So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2941 on: March 28, 2017, 02:33:45 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:29:11 AM
Quote from: Rayzor on March 28, 2017, 02:28:03 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:26:09 AM
So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?

My position is that you are an idiot.   I suspect you are about to confirm it for me.

Please answer the question.

So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?

That's what collapse means. 
Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2942 on: March 28, 2017, 02:35:49 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:29:11 AM
Quote from: Rayzor on March 28, 2017, 02:28:03 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:26:09 AM
So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?

My position is that you are an idiot.   I suspect you are about to confirm it for me.

Please answer the question.

So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?

Please answer the question.

So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2943 on: March 28, 2017, 02:41:25 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:35:49 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:29:11 AM
Quote from: Rayzor on March 28, 2017, 02:28:03 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:26:09 AM
So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?

My position is that you are an idiot.   I suspect you are about to confirm it for me.

Please answer the question.

So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?

Please answer the question.

So during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Is this your position?

How else,  you have a point to make I'm sure,  but since we've covered this many many times already you know this.  Do you have something new to add.

Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2944 on: March 28, 2017, 02:42:07 AM »
Is this, or is this not your position?

during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Please answer.
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2945 on: March 28, 2017, 02:45:03 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:42:07 AM
Is this, or is this not your position?

during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Please answer.

How many times do I have to agree before you get the message?

Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2946 on: March 28, 2017, 02:46:07 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:42:07 AM
Is this, or is this not your position?

during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Please answer.

1. Yes this is my position.

2. No this is not my position.
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2947 on: March 28, 2017, 02:51:32 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:46:07 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:42:07 AM
Is this, or is this not your position?

during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Please answer.

1. Yes this is my position.

2. No this is not my position.

You are confirming my original assertion that you are in fact an idiot.  The building collapsed for 2.25  seconds at close to free fall,  if you have a point to make that's new,  now is your chance.

Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2948 on: March 28, 2017, 02:52:29 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:46:07 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:42:07 AM
Is this, or is this not your position?

during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Please answer.

1. Yes this is my position.

2. No this is not my position.

Please answer the question, just a 1 or a 2 will be enough.

It's looking like you are not allowed to answer.
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

MaNaeSWolf

  • 2623
  • +1/-3
  • Show me the evidence
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2949 on: March 28, 2017, 02:54:07 AM »
Not to derail the thread, but I was looking for an example of engineers accidentally messing up a design that could drop a building. Just to show that sh1t happens, and occasionally buildings are not as strong as we presume they are.

here is an example of a design mistake that very nearly went completely un-noticed, and could have resulted in a massive building collapse and loss of life. I am not saying this is what happend at WTC, but its worth a footnote.
Logged
If you move fast enough, everything appears flat
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2950 on: March 28, 2017, 02:54:36 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:52:29 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:46:07 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:42:07 AM
Is this, or is this not your position?

during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Please answer.

1. Yes this is my position.

2. No this is not my position.

Please answer the question, just a 1 or a 2 will be enough.

It's looking like you are not allowed to answer.

Yes this is my position.   For the nth time.
Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2951 on: March 28, 2017, 03:00:25 AM »
Quote from: Rayzor on March 28, 2017, 02:54:36 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:52:29 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:46:07 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:42:07 AM
Is this, or is this not your position?

during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Please answer.

1. Yes this is my position.

2. No this is not my position.

Please answer the question, just a 1 or a 2 will be enough.

It's looking like you are not allowed to answer.

Yes this is my position.   For the nth time.

That was actually the first time, if you read back.

Quote from: Shyam Sunder NIST lead investigator
Freefall is an object encountering no structural resistance. Wtc 7s collapse was slower than freefall because there was structural resistance in this particular case

Do you disagree with Shyam Sunder?
« Last Edit: March 28, 2017, 03:02:22 AM by disputeone »
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2952 on: March 28, 2017, 03:04:14 AM »
Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on March 28, 2017, 02:54:07 AM
Not to derail the thread, but I was looking for an example of engineers accidentally messing up a design that could drop a building. Just to show that sh1t happens, and occasionally buildings are not as strong as we presume they are.

here is an example of a design mistake that very nearly went completely un-noticed, and could have resulted in a massive building collapse and loss of life. I am not saying this is what happend at WTC, but its worth a footnote.

Was the collapse a symmetrical free-fall?

Or did it collapse through the path of least resistance?
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2953 on: March 28, 2017, 03:09:26 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 03:00:25 AM
Quote from: Rayzor on March 28, 2017, 02:54:36 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:52:29 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:46:07 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 02:42:07 AM
Is this, or is this not your position?

during the collapse for 2.25 seconds the underlying structure provided negligible structural resistance making a fall acceleration at very close to g?

Please answer.

1. Yes this is my position.

2. No this is not my position.

Please answer the question, just a 1 or a 2 will be enough.

It's looking like you are not allowed to answer.

Yes this is my position.   For the nth time.

That was actually the first time, if you read back.

Quote from: Shyam Sunder NIST lead investigator
Freefall is an object encountering no structural resistance. Wtc 7s collapse was slower than freefall because there was structural resistance in this particular case

Do you disagree with Shyam Sunder?

You are misquoting what he said,  which is what Chandler did. 

Here is the real data.



Please get to the point if you actually have one,  I suspect that you don't actually have anything new to add apart from your previous inane ramblings and spamming.

I chose this data, specifically to debunk  Hulsey's assertion that the debris impact damage was minimal,  a 20 story gash in the south side is far from minimal.

« Last Edit: March 28, 2017, 03:11:45 AM by Rayzor »
Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2954 on: March 28, 2017, 03:11:30 AM »
You said.

There was negligible structural resistance for 2.25 seconds.

Shyam Sunder said.

Freefall is an object encountering no structural resistance. Wtc 7s collapse was slower than freefall because there was structural resistance in this particular case

Which one of you is correct?

You can't both be right.

Hulsey never asserted the damage was minimal he is considering absolutely all evidence, a table with writing on it is not evidence, it is assertion.

He is nowhere near done, I can't wait for peer review.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2017, 03:14:40 AM by disputeone »
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2955 on: March 28, 2017, 03:21:37 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 03:11:30 AM
You said.

There was negligible structural resistance for 2.25 seconds.

Shyam Sunder said.

Freefall is an object encountering no structural resistance. Wtc 7s collapse was slower than freefall because there was structural resistance in this particular case

Which one of you is correct?

You can't both be right.

Hulsey never asserted the damage is minimal he is considering absolutely all evidence, he is nowhere near done, I can't wait for peer review

Actually Hulsey said in  his earlier progress reports that the debris impact damage was minimal,  and further stated that the office fires were small and burnt out in 20 minutes.   Neither of these assumptions is true.

None of his student's workbooks even mention fire temperatures,  and none of his data available for download is even remotely relevant to his conclusions.   All they have posted is just stuff  someone else got under FOI.   No model data,  no model outputs that I could see.    I said already I smell a con job.

Also,  It's not clear that the drawings provided under FOI and used by Hulsey are the original design or include the subsequent alterations made for Saloman.  Which involved removing whole floors as well as  extensive restructuring.







Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2956 on: March 28, 2017, 03:26:42 AM »
Wow you follow the script...

Quote from: disputeone on March 26, 2017, 08:40:16 PM
Rayzor I have summarised your debate tactics as a reference and guide for you.

*Encourage group shaming and group think as a first priority.

*Always quote and support the official story, if any evidence doesn't support the OS, then deny it and re-quote the official story.

*Deny any and all facts that go against the official story.

*Discredit anyone that goes against the official story.

*Push controlled opposition conspiracy theories e.g aliens, holographic planes, death rays from space.

*Speak from a position of authority on all subjects, never provide proof of authority.

*Give absolutely no quarter, if you can't answer a question honestly descredit the poster and distract the debate.

*Offer the official story as the only explanation, keep trying to exaggerate your opponents position and twist their words out of meaning.

*Attack only the weakest points of your opponent's argument, if there are no weak enough points, create a strawman and tear it to shreds.

This is a free reference if you get stuck.

I am sure you can air your issues during peer review. Hulsey is giving us this option.

Isn't science great.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2017, 03:28:59 AM by disputeone »
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2957 on: March 28, 2017, 03:34:38 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 03:26:42 AM
Wow you follow the script...

Quote from: disputeone on March 26, 2017, 08:40:16 PM
Rayzor I have summarised your debate tactics as a reference and guide for you.

*Encourage group shaming and group think as a first priority.

*Always quote and support the official story, if any evidence doesn't support the OS, then deny it and re-quote the official story.

*Deny any and all facts that go against the official story.

*Discredit anyone that goes against the official story.

*Push controlled opposition conspiracy theories e.g aliens, holographic planes, death rays from space.

*Speak from a position of authority on all subjects, never provide proof of authority.

*Give absolutely no quarter, if you can't answer a question honestly descredit the poster and distract the debate.

*Offer the official story as the only explanation, keep trying to exaggerate your opponents position and twist their words out of meaning.

*Attack only the weakest points of your opponent's argument, if there are no weak enough points, create a strawman and tear it to shreds.

This is a free reference if you get stuck.

I am sure you can air your issues during peer review. Hulsey is giving us this option.

Isn't science great.

Did you actually have a point or not.   After 100 pages of having nothing new to add,  I suspect not.   
Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2958 on: March 28, 2017, 03:36:39 AM »
Fall acceleration and symmetry of wtc 7.

Is my strongest evidence, I believe, I has moar.

It hasn't been satisfactorily explained using the official stories version of collapse.

I can explain it easily.
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2959 on: March 28, 2017, 03:44:27 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 03:36:39 AM
Fall acceleration and symmetry of wtc 7.

Is my strongest evidence, I believe, I has moar.

It hasn't been satisfactorily explained using the official stories version of collapse.

I can explain it easily.

Why don't you.  "Explain it easily"
Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2960 on: March 28, 2017, 03:50:48 AM »
I keep bringing it up because you won't talk about it.

I admit I have a vested interest in this, it's obvious by now how much I care.

What is your excuse for 100 pages of dodging my first reply?

Here is where we left it.

Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 03:11:30 AM
You said.

There was negligible structural resistance for 2.25 seconds.

Shyam Sunder said.

Freefall is an object encountering no structural resistance. Wtc 7s collapse was slower than freefall because there was structural resistance in this particular case

Which one of you is correct?

You can't both be right.

Why not just debate honestly, you could say Shyam was wrong originally then they changed their analysis to a three stage collapse.  (in my opinion an attempt not to address the free-fall.)

Let's debate, no ad hominems.

Here is me explaining what we saw happen to wtc 7, please note it looks nearly identical. More often than not wtc 7s collapse is faster, smoother and more symmetrical.

Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2961 on: March 28, 2017, 03:56:17 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 03:50:48 AM
I keep bringing it up because you won't talk about it.

No you keep bringing it up because you can't read or don't understand the answers given over and over.   So it seems you've still got nothing other than  "I think it's controlled demolition"  therefore it must be. 
Seems like a pretty tenuous basis for a conspiracy that will eventually take your soul and sanity.

I'll refrain from pointing out that demolishing WTC7 makes no logical sense from any rational point of view.   Oh, wait,  I just did. 

Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2962 on: March 28, 2017, 03:57:51 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 03:50:48 AM
Here is where we left it.

Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 03:11:30 AM
You said.

There was negligible structural resistance for 2.25 seconds.

Shyam Sunder said.

Freefall is an object encountering no structural resistance. Wtc 7s collapse was slower than freefall because there was structural resistance in this particular case

Which one of you is correct?

You can't both be right.

Why not just debate honestly.
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2963 on: March 28, 2017, 04:02:20 AM »
Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on March 28, 2017, 02:54:07 AM
Not to derail the thread, but I was looking for an example of engineers accidentally messing up a design that could drop a building. Just to show that sh1t happens, and occasionally buildings are not as strong as we presume they are.

here is an example of a design mistake that very nearly went completely un-noticed, and could have resulted in a massive building collapse and loss of life. I am not saying this is what happend at WTC, but its worth a footnote.

Great example of how easily mistakes can be made.   In the case of WTC7 there was a Con Edison power station that they had to build over, and that led to a weird cantilever structure, that bridged the sub station,  NIST concluded that the unusual structure played no part in the ultimate collapse,  but there was other strange things done to that building when Saloman Brothers spent 200 million removing floors and installing large back up diesel generators.   One other factor in the collapse of WTC7 is the damage caused by the debris from the collapse of WTC1.   Then there's the fires that burned uncontrolled for 7 hours.

Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2964 on: March 28, 2017, 04:03:49 AM »
Hulsey is addressing all this Rayzor.

He is putting everything into the model they will give him. If the information is purposefully withheld he can't be held responsible for not including it.

I can't wait for peer review.

Oh and if you had actually read his stuff he states clearly that he is not releasing his data until after peer review.

So quit it with the con job hey? It's disgusting. The man is infinitely more qualified than you are to investigate building collapse.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2017, 04:07:37 AM by disputeone »
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2965 on: March 28, 2017, 04:07:38 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 04:03:49 AM
Hulsey is addressing all this Rayzor.

He is putting everything into the model they will give him. If the information is purposefully withheld he can't be held responsible for not including it.

I can't wait for peer review.

Have you downloaded his model?
Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2966 on: March 28, 2017, 04:08:19 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 04:03:49 AM
Hulsey is addressing all this Rayzor.

Oh and if you had actually read his stuff he states clearly that he is not releasing his data until after peer review.

So quit it with the con job hey? It's disgusting. The man is infinitely more qualified than you are to investigate building collapse.
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2967 on: March 28, 2017, 04:14:45 AM »






Don't be scared, it's only science.
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
*

Rayzor

  • 12195
  • +0/-6
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2968 on: March 28, 2017, 04:20:34 AM »
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 04:08:19 AM
Quote from: disputeone on March 28, 2017, 04:03:49 AM
Hulsey is addressing all this Rayzor.

Oh and if you had actually read his stuff he states clearly that he is not releasing his data until after peer review.

So quit it with the con job hey? It's disgusting. The man is infinitely more qualified than you are to investigate building collapse.

There's nothing in any of the work diaries from mid 2015 onwards?   How is that being open and transparent.  Did his students quit?

If he's written a paper, perhaps you could post a link to it.


Logged
Quote from: Space Cowgirl on March 01, 2018, 01:35:42 PM
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
*

disputeone

  • 28036
  • +112/-112
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #2969 on: March 28, 2017, 04:27:37 AM »
He is not releasing his data until after peer review.

He's been infinitely more honest and open than NIST was.

I can't be more clear.
Logged
Quote from: Crouton on July 15, 2024, 05:37:14 AM
Why would that be inciting terrorism?  Lorddave was merely describing a type of shop we have here in the US, a bomb-gun shop.  A shop that sells bomb-guns.
Pages: 1 ... 97 98 [99] 100 101 ... 229   Go Up
« previous next »