Total Members Voted: 23
Voting closed: March 06, 2017, 10:56:40 PM
Audible kek.
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.
Sorry Scepti, I admire free thinking, but the earth isn't flat, and we don't live under a dome.
Scepti I am nearly 29, not that old but I have lived a long life. I believe in my heart no cause is greater than fighting against the people who would seek to and have already partially enslaved us. With truth and information. I've spent a long time being selfish and it hasn't made me happy.I believe in my heart that if the people are well informed we will make good choices. Democracy is a beautiful thing, a lot of us just want to restore it to what it was and what it was meant to be. The American constitution is a great example. It has sadly and unforgivably been subverted. When we have unelected corrupt sociopaths running our lives it's a big issue for me.
Kevin Shipp lays it out specifically.He's a personal hero of mine. [Youtube][/youtube]We want to oust the unelected shadow government and restore democracy. Through non violent means, with good information and honesty, integrity and truth. By informing the people of the methods and systems that control and subvert them.
No videos show up.Can you answer my question in red bold?
We want to oust the unelected shadow government and restore democracy. Through non violent memes, with good information and honesty, integrity and truth. By informing the people of the methods and systems that control and subvert them.Edit for lulz.
I'm a recovering CIA agent, we take 24 step programs, the first 12 steps are learning how to tell the truth again.
Quote from: sceptimatic on September 22, 2017, 03:55:26 AMNo videos show up.Can you answer my question in red bold?Quote from: disputeone on September 22, 2017, 03:50:58 AMWe want to oust the unelected shadow government and restore democracy. Through non violent memes, with good information and honesty, integrity and truth. By informing the people of the methods and systems that control and subvert them.Edit for lulz.It's a long video but worth a watch. He's a veteran counter "terrorism" CIA agent whistleblower. Grab the url from a quote.Quote from: Kevin ShippI'm a recovering CIA agent, we take 24 step programs, the first 12 steps are learning how to tell the truth again.With that said, I'll ask you to keep this thread on topic. We could continue this in philosophy if you want?
Perhaps you would like to debunk my post Bullwinkle?
Audible kek.You guys forgot to stomp your feet.
Quote from: disputeone on September 22, 2017, 04:13:25 AMAudible kek.You guys forgot to stomp your feet.So, do we forget or forgive?I am Bullwinkle.I am reason.I forgive.I forget.I'll call if I'm going to be late.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.
Quote from: Babyhighspeed on September 21, 2017, 10:38:55 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 21, 2017, 10:27:09 PMAudible lol.Doesn't seeing the formation make a good quarterback?I think the truth needs to be seen in this thread. Newton, common sense, engineering, physics etc cannot be debunked unless you use fairy tales such as giants....so expect ad hominems and gas lighting. A very simple yet effective form of deflection.Check the thread title, for a clue. The truth about 9/11 conspiracy nutters. is that they are paranoid delusional whack jobs. Totally beyond the reach of logic and reason.
Quote from: disputeone on September 21, 2017, 10:27:09 PMAudible lol.Doesn't seeing the formation make a good quarterback?I think the truth needs to be seen in this thread. Newton, common sense, engineering, physics etc cannot be debunked unless you use fairy tales such as giants....so expect ad hominems and gas lighting. A very simple yet effective form of deflection.
Audible lol.
Quote from: Rayzor on September 22, 2017, 12:56:45 AMQuote from: Babyhighspeed on September 21, 2017, 10:38:55 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 21, 2017, 10:27:09 PMAudible lol.Doesn't seeing the formation make a good quarterback?I think the truth needs to be seen in this thread. Newton, common sense, engineering, physics etc cannot be debunked unless you use fairy tales such as giants....so expect ad hominems and gas lighting. A very simple yet effective form of deflection.Check the thread title, for a clue. The truth about 9/11 conspiracy nutters. is that they are paranoid delusional whack jobs. Totally beyond the reach of logic and reason.This is exactly what a shill would say.
Quote from: hoppy on September 22, 2017, 04:46:17 AMQuote from: Rayzor on September 22, 2017, 12:56:45 AMQuote from: Babyhighspeed on September 21, 2017, 10:38:55 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 21, 2017, 10:27:09 PMAudible lol.Doesn't seeing the formation make a good quarterback?I think the truth needs to be seen in this thread. Newton, common sense, engineering, physics etc cannot be debunked unless you use fairy tales such as giants....so expect ad hominems and gas lighting. A very simple yet effective form of deflection.Check the thread title, for a clue. The truth about 9/11 conspiracy nutters. is that they are paranoid delusional whack jobs. Totally beyond the reach of logic and reason.This is exactly what a shill would say.Thank you, can you call me a "psyop shill" in future, I'm angling for a pay rise.
Quote from: disputeone on September 22, 2017, 03:43:13 AMPerhaps you would like to debunk my post Bullwinkle?I thoroughly debunk thee.
I'll give you one chance, and one only, provide verifiable evidence for your assertions. I'll listen to whatever you present as fairly as I can.
This post debunks your assertion that the entire core collapsed leaving the outside intact and then the "outer facade" collapsing at free-fall.Please read it and respond to it.Here.Can you debunk this post? If it's as stupid and I'm as stupid as you all claim surely a smart guy like you can debunk it.Quote from: disputeone on September 21, 2017, 05:46:15 PMNo the video of the collapse shows the failure of columns 79, 80, and 81, causing a partial building collapse. (The collapse of the east penthouse.)None of these were core columns and then after a few seconds, the entire core failed nearly simultaneously causing a 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall of the entire bulding. Remeber the "outer facade" had 18 structural support columns making any natural free-fall impossible.@Rayzor.Quote from: Rayzor on September 20, 2017, 04:05:20 AMQuote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 03:59:31 AMQuote from: Rayzor on September 20, 2017, 03:54:44 AMQuote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 03:33:41 AMYou still haven't addressed your post trying to debunk Newton. Do you stand by it?You seriously think I'm trying to debunk Newton?I do, yes.See.Quote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 10:00:14 PMQuote from: Rayzor on September 19, 2017, 09:51:48 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 09:50:33 PMWe'll soon see about that.Yes, Hulsey's simultaneous collapse theory. What a joke.In order for the building to collapse at free-fall the entire core had to fail nearly simultaneously. Structural resistance slows fall acceleration. If you don't like it take it up with Newton, not me.http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Newt.htmlAh, I see where you went wrong, you forgot that the center had already collapsed / was collapsing BEFORE the facade came down. I really can't keep holding you hand while you work through these things, you have to start to think for yourself if you are going to be a good anon campaigner.Quote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 04:10:35 AMThats not true that's the conclusions of the fraudulent NIST report. That is merely the lie we were sold.Furthermore, even if the entire inner core collapsed leaving the entire "facade" intact (which is impossible because of the cross bracing) there were still 18 support columns around the exterior.A free fall collapse even under your fairytale conditions is still impossible without a controlled demolition. You are trying to debunk Newton.Q.E.D.Edit.Video evidence.[Youtube][/youtube]For reference Rayzor believes this debunks it. Notice he says it's "been debunked" since his first post on the topic.Quote from: Rayzor on February 13, 2017, 11:18:08 PMWe already debunked that free-fall argument. But just to recap, how is it possible for the rooftop of a building to fall? Doesn't the fact that it collapsed at all mean that the building structure supporting the roof is collapsing, why would you be surprised that it fell at a free fall rate. At least until it hit ground and other debris piled up, The graph in the NIST shows it quite clearly. You say you work in the industry, you mean the building industry? In what capacity?What caused the core to collapse at free-fall
No the video of the collapse shows the failure of columns 79, 80, and 81, causing a partial building collapse. (The collapse of the east penthouse.)None of these were core columns and then after a few seconds, the entire core failed nearly simultaneously causing a 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall of the entire bulding. Remeber the "outer facade" had 18 structural support columns making any natural free-fall impossible.@Rayzor.Quote from: Rayzor on September 20, 2017, 04:05:20 AMQuote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 03:59:31 AMQuote from: Rayzor on September 20, 2017, 03:54:44 AMQuote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 03:33:41 AMYou still haven't addressed your post trying to debunk Newton. Do you stand by it?You seriously think I'm trying to debunk Newton?I do, yes.See.Quote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 10:00:14 PMQuote from: Rayzor on September 19, 2017, 09:51:48 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 09:50:33 PMWe'll soon see about that.Yes, Hulsey's simultaneous collapse theory. What a joke.In order for the building to collapse at free-fall the entire core had to fail nearly simultaneously. Structural resistance slows fall acceleration. If you don't like it take it up with Newton, not me.http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Newt.htmlAh, I see where you went wrong, you forgot that the center had already collapsed / was collapsing BEFORE the facade came down. I really can't keep holding you hand while you work through these things, you have to start to think for yourself if you are going to be a good anon campaigner.Quote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 04:10:35 AMThats not true that's the conclusions of the fraudulent NIST report. That is merely the lie we were sold.Furthermore, even if the entire inner core collapsed leaving the entire "facade" intact (which is impossible because of the cross bracing) there were still 18 support columns around the exterior.A free fall collapse even under your fairytale conditions is still impossible without a controlled demolition. You are trying to debunk Newton.Q.E.D.
Quote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 03:59:31 AMQuote from: Rayzor on September 20, 2017, 03:54:44 AMQuote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 03:33:41 AMYou still haven't addressed your post trying to debunk Newton. Do you stand by it?You seriously think I'm trying to debunk Newton?I do, yes.See.Quote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 10:00:14 PMQuote from: Rayzor on September 19, 2017, 09:51:48 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 09:50:33 PMWe'll soon see about that.Yes, Hulsey's simultaneous collapse theory. What a joke.In order for the building to collapse at free-fall the entire core had to fail nearly simultaneously. Structural resistance slows fall acceleration. If you don't like it take it up with Newton, not me.http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Newt.htmlAh, I see where you went wrong, you forgot that the center had already collapsed / was collapsing BEFORE the facade came down. I really can't keep holding you hand while you work through these things, you have to start to think for yourself if you are going to be a good anon campaigner.
Quote from: Rayzor on September 20, 2017, 03:54:44 AMQuote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 03:33:41 AMYou still haven't addressed your post trying to debunk Newton. Do you stand by it?You seriously think I'm trying to debunk Newton?I do, yes.See.Quote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 10:00:14 PMQuote from: Rayzor on September 19, 2017, 09:51:48 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 09:50:33 PMWe'll soon see about that.Yes, Hulsey's simultaneous collapse theory. What a joke.In order for the building to collapse at free-fall the entire core had to fail nearly simultaneously. Structural resistance slows fall acceleration. If you don't like it take it up with Newton, not me.http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Newt.html
Quote from: disputeone on September 20, 2017, 03:33:41 AMYou still haven't addressed your post trying to debunk Newton. Do you stand by it?You seriously think I'm trying to debunk Newton?
You still haven't addressed your post trying to debunk Newton. Do you stand by it?
Quote from: Rayzor on September 19, 2017, 09:51:48 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 09:50:33 PMWe'll soon see about that.Yes, Hulsey's simultaneous collapse theory. What a joke.In order for the building to collapse at free-fall the entire core had to fail nearly simultaneously. Structural resistance slows fall acceleration. If you don't like it take it up with Newton, not me.http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Newt.html
Quote from: disputeone on September 19, 2017, 09:50:33 PMWe'll soon see about that.Yes, Hulsey's simultaneous collapse theory. What a joke.
We'll soon see about that.
Thats not true that's the conclusions of the fraudulent NIST report. That is merely the lie we were sold.Furthermore, even if the entire inner core collapsed leaving the entire "facade" intact (which is impossible because of the cross bracing) there were still 18 support columns around the exterior.A free fall collapse even under your fairytale conditions is still impossible without a controlled demolition. You are trying to debunk Newton.Q.E.D.
We already debunked that free-fall argument. But just to recap, how is it possible for the rooftop of a building to fall? Doesn't the fact that it collapsed at all mean that the building structure supporting the roof is collapsing, why would you be surprised that it fell at a free fall rate. At least until it hit ground and other debris piled up, The graph in the NIST shows it quite clearly. You say you work in the industry, you mean the building industry? In what capacity?
Quote from: Bullwinkle on September 21, 2017, 07:40:41 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 21, 2017, 07:35:45 PMWhat caused the core to collapse at free-fallOpposed to hovering in place?Watch the video. When the west penthouse fails the building immediately collapses.Video evidence.[Youtube][/youtube]
Quote from: disputeone on September 21, 2017, 07:35:45 PMWhat caused the core to collapse at free-fallOpposed to hovering in place?
What caused the core to collapse at free-fall
Quote from: Rayzor on September 21, 2017, 07:49:46 PMQuote from: disputeone on September 21, 2017, 07:43:13 PMWhen the west penthouse fails the building immediately collapses.Gee, I wonder what was holding up the penthouse?The core. Therefore as soon as the core failed the building came down. Hulsey is right.Video evidence.[Youtube][/youtube]
Quote from: disputeone on September 21, 2017, 07:43:13 PMWhen the west penthouse fails the building immediately collapses.Gee, I wonder what was holding up the penthouse?
When the west penthouse fails the building immediately collapses.
Quote from: Babyhighspeed on September 22, 2017, 01:01:43 AMQuote from: Rayzor on September 22, 2017, 12:56:45 AMCheck the thread title, for a clue. The truth about 9/11 conspiracy nutters. is that they are paranoid delusional whack jobs. Totally beyond the reach of logic and reason.Wow an ad hominem...I am Jack's complete lack of surprise...Do you have anything else?Let's see how honest you really are. Just answer 2 simple questions.1. Why bother to demolish a building that was about to collapse? All they had to do was wait.2. Why wait 7 hours before the demolition.I've never gotten honest answers to either question.
Quote from: Rayzor on September 22, 2017, 12:56:45 AMCheck the thread title, for a clue. The truth about 9/11 conspiracy nutters. is that they are paranoid delusional whack jobs. Totally beyond the reach of logic and reason.Wow an ad hominem...I am Jack's complete lack of surprise...Do you have anything else?
Check the thread title, for a clue. The truth about 9/11 conspiracy nutters. is that they are paranoid delusional whack jobs. Totally beyond the reach of logic and reason.
Quote from: sockarul on September 21, 2017, 07:12:35 PMThat was easy.So you have video evidence of wtc 7 being a giant coke can and a giant stomping on it causing it to collapse?I havent heard that hypothesis yet.Also I can't see the giant in the official footage.[Youtube][/youtube]
That was easy.
It's no slur if it's fact.
Still waiting for an honest response from BHS.
Those questions do not debunk physics. We are quite good at prediciting mechanical processes now. Newton showed us how.Quote1. Why bother demolishing a building that was already in danger of collapsing?Destroy evidence linking the CIA and Mossad to 9/11.Quote2. Why wait 7 hours before demolition?Same reason it wasn't mentioned on the official commission report. Try and limit peoples knowlege of wtc 7s collapse.
1. Why bother demolishing a building that was already in danger of collapsing?
2. Why wait 7 hours before demolition?
It simply shows a strong outside support system can fail easily when the loads become unbalanced.
Where were the 57 explosions to take out the columns?
The sooner you realize a building can't be brought down with explosives and no one notice the better.
This just in, gravity.
Poll