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

onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#256246 Jun 6, 2013
The dust trails of the fallen debris is so overlooked. Due to the dust the debris cannot be seen until it starts downward. The dust trails curve up and outward before heading down.
How does the beginning or the collapse defy the laws of gravity???
Does gravity work differently in NY???


“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#256247 Jun 6, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>Heres proof that WTC debris actually fell faster than gravity due to energetic material, confirming Steven Jones Nano Thermate.

http://youtu.be/xvw0_i1rGns

But of course

Insults Are Easier
Oh the hilarity from TEAM TWOOF!

An incendiary propelled what appears to be a piece of aluminum cladding faster than the free falling debris!

But only in Twooferdumb.

Here in reality we see there's nothing propelling the debris. Anyone who's ever seen a rocket on video or live can attest to the fact that the jet stream propelling the rocket moves at a much greater velocity that the rocket itself.

Here in reality too we know nano means really effing small and thermite is FE2O3+AL2.

Now as an industrial compressor guy I understand fully that the only way to create velocity from an exothermic reaction like this would be to contain the gases in a pressure rates vessel of some type then release them slowly to allow pressure to build.

And why would anyone do that to a piece of cladding...or any member of a building being demolished?

They wouldn't and a previous post of mine (nod to chazmo) gave a perfectly valid mechanism for accelerating debris caught in the path of the collapse front.

Once again, twoofer pseudoscience can't hold a candle to real science.

Oh and btw, since Ignorance is Bliss is all about observation...perhaps someone could point out the blinding light coming from this alleged reaction which is known for such observable behaviour?

And explain how nano thermite painted a few microns thick, allegedly, could produce enough thrust to propel something which weighs perhaps 1000 or more pounds.

Twoof can't answer such relevant questions because,

[Their] Ignorance is [Their] Bliss

Ps. There's a plethora more things wrong about Chandlers video. All it shows in the end is that twoofers aren't only scientifically illiterate, they also have zero skill for observation.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#256248 Jun 6, 2013
onemale wrote:
The dust trails of the fallen debris is so overlooked. Due to the dust the debris cannot be seen until it starts downward. The dust trails curve up and outward before heading down.
How does the beginning or the collapse defy the laws of gravity???
Does gravity work differently in NY???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =x7kGZ3XPEm4XX
It doesn't defy any physical laws.

Your problem is that you don't understand physics in the least.

It was just a few days ago you couldn't understand why a twoofer was wrong when claiming the towers were designed to hold a static load but it failed to do so when the system became dynamic.

A few days before that you (my personal favorite, it's just so dumb!) claimed the steel of your engine doesn't warp or melt so why should the steel used in the construction of the towers?

You really should get your mommy to sue school district where you were educated.

You really are that clueless.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#256249 Jun 6, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't defy any physical laws.
Your problem is that you don't understand physics in the least.
It was just a few days ago you couldn't understand why a twoofer was wrong when claiming the towers were designed to hold a static load but it failed to do so when the system became dynamic.
A few days before that you (my personal favorite, it's just so dumb!) claimed the steel of your engine doesn't warp or melt so why should the steel used in the construction of the towers?
You really should get your mommy to sue school district where you were educated.
You really are that clueless.
Indeed!!!
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#256250 Jun 6, 2013
9/11 And Newtons Laws Of Motion

onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#256251 Jun 6, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't defy any physical laws.
Your problem is that you don't understand physics in the least.
It was just a few days ago you couldn't understand why a twoofer was wrong when claiming the towers were designed to hold a static load but it failed to do so when the system became dynamic.
A few days before that you (my personal favorite, it's just so dumb!) claimed the steel of your engine doesn't warp or melt so why should the steel used in the construction of the towers?
You really should get your mommy to sue school district where you were educated.
You really are that clueless.
I once heard a professional sales trainer say it is human nature to overlook the obvious, and I see that to be very true especially on here.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#256252 Jun 7, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>I once heard a professional sales trainer say it is human nature to overlook the obvious, and I see that to be very true especially on here.
So you do read your own posts.

Well, I guess that's a start.

Like claiming there were projections of material going up when it's extremely obvious in video that it was really smoke trails following the collapse down!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#256253 Jun 7, 2013
onemale wrote:
9/11 And Newtons Laws Of Motion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =Xevv8ITcJGkXX
But the "Newton" being referred to in your yourube isn't the great physicist, it's a pimply faced 14 year old with daddy issues and no clue about physics.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256254 Jun 7, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
I once heard a professional sales trainer say it is human nature to overlook the obvious, and I see that to be very true especially on here.
... and then you got your WallMart nametag and a timecard.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#256255 Jun 7, 2013
onemale wrote:
9/11 And Newtons Laws Of Motion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =Xevv8ITcJGkXX
Newton....., Fig Newton.

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#256256 Jun 7, 2013
..... I think his name is Larry Newton, a 7th grader from Camden NJ
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
But the "Newton" being referred to in your yourube isn't the great physicist, it's a pimply faced 14 year old with daddy issues and no clue about physics.
ZOMBIE COMMUNIST

Lincoln, NE

#256257 Jun 7, 2013
RADEKT wrote:
..... I think his name is Larry Newton, a 7th grader from Camden NJ
<quoted text>
Was he the one that re-discovered gravity with a bucket of frogs and a highway overpass?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#256259 Jun 7, 2013
RADEKT wrote:
<quoted text>..... I think his name is Larry Newton, a 7th grader from Camden NJ
We'll see how Larry likes permanent detention for screwing with the NWO then!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#256260 Jun 7, 2013
ZOMBIE COMMUNIST wrote:
<quoted text>
Was he the one that re-discovered gravity with a bucket of frogs and a highway overpass?
... but the Bible says frogs rained down.

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#256264 Jun 7, 2013
Because we are not above getting rid of a 7th grader that is screwing with our attempt at world domination !!!
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
We'll see how Larry likes permanent detention for screwing with the NWO then!
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#256265 Jun 7, 2013
9/11 Crash Physics
RIP Newton's Laws of Motion (1687-2001)



An NFL Fan

“Brevity is the soule of wit”

Since: May 09

USA

#256266 Jun 7, 2013
onemale wrote:
9/11 Crash Physics
RIP Newton's Laws of Motion (1687-2001)
More Youtube 'proof'.

Was the building made of stone or some other material that would negate the impact energy? I don't think so, but hang onto your nut-ball crap. It's all you have.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#256267 Jun 7, 2013
An NFL Fan wrote:
<quoted text>
More Youtube 'proof'.
Was the building made of stone or some other material that would negate the impact energy? I don't think so, but hang onto your nut-ball crap. It's all you have.
Just NIST you deny Newton's Law3
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#256268 Jun 8, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
So you do read your own posts.
Well, I guess that's a start.
Like claiming there were projections of material going up when it's extremely obvious in video that it was really smoke trails following the collapse down!
That only proves you're an idiot, and everyone knows it, you don't need to keep proving it.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#256269 Jun 8, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
... and then you got your WallMart nametag and a timecard.
Actually I have worked as a machininst for 25 years

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
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min Bongo 37,147
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 20 min Tony 6,550
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 24 min Gods r Delusion x... 688,822
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 32 min Aerobatty 988,546
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 2 hr Classic 4,333
We do NOT need any walls! 6 hr Paul is dead 34
Harden and James....'the Beard Brothers' 6 hr Doctor REALITY 2
More from around the web