Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

55,132 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255261 Apr 29, 2013
TRANSLATION: Dig, Dig Dig, Dig, I can see light, I'm almost out ..... YAAAHHHHHH ..... LAVA!
911 was an inside job wrote:
<quoted text>
I want to see the full quote.
By the way, there is nothing about "1.99" that implies or invokes accuracy.(I'm pretty sure I also mentioned "1.999" and maybe used "..." or the word "etc.")
Also,
1.999999999999999+0.0000000000 00001 = 2 is a 100% accurate statement.
-----
If we pretend you actually had algebra, you might have seen something like:
Given x+y=2 and x-2y=1. Solve for x and y.
Does the fact that the problem as stated only involves integers imply that the solutions are integers? Or should I give my answer rounded to the nearest integer (because of the "implied accuracy" you claim) along with a statment of error factor?
Keep digging, pup.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255262 Apr 29, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Logic doesn't dictate anything. probable means it is possible ,not the only or even the best solution to solving a problem , but possibly.
Did you leave out the word "best" to create a stawman?

"Not to mention the BEST probable explanation does not lose credibility by pointing out it is "probable", logic dictates one must prove there is a more "probable" alternative."
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255263 Apr 29, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
I can give you a more probable alternative , Two planes hit the towers setting off a chain of brilliantly placed demolition charges causing the buildings to collapse into rubble. But this scenario was not included in the nist ncstar 1 report nor the building 7 report making these incomplete .
Then how did the charges survive the fires for an hour, and SHOW US ANY evidence of EXPLOSIVES.(Not explosions).

Hummm ... Not even probable.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#255264 Apr 29, 2013
Patriots and Veterans for 9/11 Truth
Short and quick to the point:

&li st=PLE4F028FD4F43716E
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255265 Apr 29, 2013
onemale wrote:
Patriots and Veterans for 9/11 Truth
Short and quick to the point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =vvZxBnHF_YYXX&list=PLE4F0 28FD4F43716E
Do they have anything about cloning Ted Olsens wife in an underground hive?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255267 Apr 29, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Logic doesn't dictate anything.
The twoofer motto has never been more apparent.

“Kenyan-born Obama=Antichrist”

Since: Sep 09

Casper, WY

#255268 Apr 29, 2013
oh the irony wrote:
<quoted text>
delicious...keep digging
Kenyan-born Obama is the antichrist/Big Brother/King-despot usheringin the NWO.
The Freemasons number approx. six-million about half in the U.S. They are the ones responsible for 9/11, the OKC Bombing, Pearl Harbor, Lusitania, Titanic and most presidential election results. They are the tool of the Illuminati/devil. They are the reason we actually have an illegal-alien thug in The Whitehouse. Our 33rd Prez was a 33rd Deg Freemason and had once been a Klansman in Kansas City.
oh the irony

Richmond, KY

#255269 Apr 29, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
You accept nothing but the ravings of charlatans and lunatics.
You've been given evidence contrary to crap you've posted many times and have completely ignored it just posting more long debunked garbage rather than addressing posts that debunk you.
Go back and address the posts debunking your fictitious stand down order, then maybe we'll talk.
simply...delicious

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#255270 Apr 29, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean they missed a few parts out of endless ones, in the maze of New Youk cities maze of alleys, crevices and rooftops.
And that proves what again? Weak!
It proves you are an idiot. There were a finite number of parts, not an endless number....

911 was an inside job

Austin, TX

#255271 Apr 29, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea, But energy at exit is not relevant LMFAO, and you are still wrong, parts flew quite a ways, how do you know they did not have the energies *AT EXIT* were not available for
severing/deforming the steel columns!
TWOOFER LOGIC!
Well, Charles, the energy that a part has immediately upon leaving the Towers is actually very relevant -- and it's a real shame you keep losing your ass like that.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#255273 Apr 29, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Do they have anything about cloning Ted Olsens wife in an underground hive?
Does that mean you aren't smart enough to click on the link?
I don't ponder on any one pace of evidence I have looked at hundreds. Like Jesse Ventura, I go where the evidence leads

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255274 Apr 30, 2013
911 was an inside job wrote:
<quoted text>Well, Charles, the energy that a part has immediately upon leaving the Towers is actually very relevant -- and it's a real shame you keep losing your ass like that.
Well lil twoofer, you've lost your train of thought and your argument which was that the energy left after crashing through the building couldn't be used for damaging load bearing components.

In other words, the energy used after exiting the building is irrelevant because the energy for damaging has already been expended.

It's just like your infinite finite element analysis argument...lost on you due to your own ignorance.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255275 Apr 30, 2013
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>It proves you are an idiot. There were a finite number of parts, not an endless number....
So they should have had a check list t count the number of parts collected and not have an expectation that some could have been rendered to itty bitty pieces?

Keep in mind the force of the collapses and how much rendering could be achieved as it happened.

That it wedged itself where it did was an oddity. Nothing more, nothing less.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255276 Apr 30, 2013
oh the irony wrote:
<quoted text>simply...delicious
Oh the boredom!
911 was an inside job

Austin, TX

#255277 Apr 30, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
TRANSLATION: Dig, Dig Dig, Dig, I can see light, I'm almost out ..... YAAAHHHHHH ..... LAVA!
<quoted text>
I'm guessing neither you nor the Canadian tried to solve the simple algebra problem I gave you for homework, huh? No doubt you would have LYFAO all over your keyboard.

Here it is again... Porkpie's equation and a second simple one, so that we don't have to stare into the infinite abyss of possible solutions that Porkpie's equation alone yields:

----------
Given x+y=2 and x-2y=1. Solve for x and y.
----------

From Porkpie's equation, we can solve for y --> y=2-x
Then we can substitute this into the second equation, like so:
x-2(2-x)=1 --> x-4+2x=1 -->3x=5 ==> x=5/3 and y=1/3

So x=1.666...(Holy Mary Mother of God! An infinitely repeating decimal AND the Mark of the Beast!)
and y=0.333...(Yikes!! A pair of infinities! What to do?!)

That just "defies logic and reality and is a totally unreasonable assumption and violates the accuracy implied in the original problem", huh?!

Porkpie is reaching for his FINITE element analysis first aid kit now, and you're LYFAO again...

Maybe we need to go back and review addition and subtraction tomorrow. You boys won't ever get up to speed without a grasp of the fundamentals.
911 was an inside job

Austin, TX

#255278 Apr 30, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Well lil twoofer, you've lost your train of thought and your argument which was that the energy left after crashing through the building couldn't be used for damaging load bearing components.
In other words, the energy used after exiting the building is irrelevant because the energy for damaging has already been expended.
It's just like your infinite finite element analysis argument...lost on you due to your own ignorance.
Okay, then. We will work on subtraction in tomorrow's lesson. Maybe I'll even give you some real-world applications...

... although that might make your little head explode.

(and Charles is most definitely at risk...)
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255279 Apr 30, 2013
911 was an inside job wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, Charles, the energy that a part has immediately upon leaving the Towers is actually very relevant -- and it's a real shame you keep losing your ass like that.
You claimed it had depleted so much it could not damage a column, show your math hole digging twoofer.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255280 Apr 30, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Does that mean you aren't smart enough to click on the link?
I don't ponder on any one pace of evidence I have looked at hundreds. Like Jesse Ventura, I go where the evidence leads
You have a link to Olsens clone wife in the hive, Infowars or Worldnet?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255281 Apr 30, 2013
911 was an inside job wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, then. We will work on subtraction in tomorrow's lesson.
Lets work with negative numbers,

911 was an inside job" - One IQ point =?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255283 Apr 30, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>Logic doesn't dictate anything. probable means it is possible ,not the only or even the best solution to solving a problem , but possibly.
After all if every possible scenario has not been entered into an equation to solve the problem then the answer is incomplete.
Its a matter of grammatical structuring . Understanding the literal meaning of the words and using them to confuse the reader . But anyone with a fourth grade education can actually look them up to yield their absolute definition .Not "probable " definition . Yes some words can mean different things when used in different contexts but it doesn't make a bit of difference how you use the word probable it will always mean it is possible and nothing more. I can give you a more probable alternative , Two planes hit the towers setting off a chain of brilliantly placed demolition charges causing the buildings to collapse into rubble. But this scenario was not included in the nist ncstar 1 report nor the building 7 report making these incomplete .
Wow!

So your more plausible explanation includes an unheard of degree of precision resulting in the pin point accuracy of a plane hitting a building in exactly the right spot going exactly the right speed at exactly the right attitude and angle to cause predictable damage to the building it hit as well as WTC 7...but miss these alleged "brilliantly placed explosives".

And the explosives in the towers delayed exploding about an hour each for the towers and 8 hours for WTC 7.

The explosives leave no audible or visual traces.

That's more plausible to you than impact>fire>creep/deform ation>structural failure>collapse.

Hmmm....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 3 min Rosa_Winkel 38,288
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 5 min Ricky F 618,404
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 16 min bad bob 182,292
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 32 min MUQ2 44,395
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 35 min Catholic24 641,620
News Python Interrupts Man's Toilet Time 35 min les 1
News Stolen car abandoned on I-229 with weapons inside 37 min les 1
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 47 min Annaleigh 104,711
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 48 min bacon hater 969,979
More from around the web