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

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#260171 Oct 2, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>Well the fact is twoof could pay for independent experts to start this much needed "new investigation" right now by having independent verification of many of their claims which are based on information readily available right now.

As I said yesterday, they could have an independent analysis of the modelling data NIST used to prove their claims that the models were tweaked to get results that showed what NIST wanted.

They could send multiple samples of their twoofer dust to independent labs for analysis for the composition of compounds.

They could have an independent analysis of the fdr data from flight 77 to prove their claims that it shows 77 never hit the Pentagon.

There's all kinds of things twoofer masters like Jones, Gage, Griffin etc could do but instead they just continue to pander to their flock or spend 10's of thousands for bill boards that won't prove 911 was an inside jobbity jobbity jobbity job but may bring more sheep to the flock.

Jeez, when I say it like that it just sounds like a cult!

Huh, eh.
Okay smear campaign cult, as you know, NIST didn't release their model to allow it to be peer reviewed. Heres a letter from Steven E. Jones requesting computer modeling data to peer review NISTs WTC report.

"To: Senator Mike Lee (Utah)
From:
Dr. Steven E. Jones
Professor of Physics, Ret.
[address given]

1. The key to good science is independent verification.
2. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was charged by Congress to explain the complete collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11/2001 (the 47-story building that was not hit by a plane).
3. NIST developed a computer model with adjustable parameters to explain the WTC 7 collapse.
4. I request that this WTC7-fall computer model be released immediately in a computer-ready form so that independent testing/verification can proceed. This model was developed using taxpayer funds.
5. In particular, NIST states in their 2008 report,
“The steel was assumed in the FDS model to be thermally-thin, thus, no thermal conductivity was used.” I challenge that assumption, and wish to insert into the computer model the known physical value for thermal conductivity, to see how this changes things.

6. There are now over 1,700 engineers and architects in the AE911Truth.org society, and I am confident that our combined expertise will permit us to perform the independent verification of the NIST WTC7 computer model, once that computer simulation is released in full to us, in computer-ready form.

7. Contact information for NIST:

Sincerely,

Dr. Steven E. Jones"

Now even if they release this computer program and its data, it still would not absolve them from the fact they could have not destroyed the physical evidence, and produced an actual investigation that proved what caused the complete collapse instead of a "probable collapse theory."

But instead of real investigation, lets just rely on the simple fact that

Insults Are Easier

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#260172 Oct 2, 2013
AussieBobby wrote:
Would you like to start here?
onemale wrote:


But where is the plane?
Where are the holes in the building where the titanium engines should have been?
Why were the steel beams pushed outward instead of inward?
Where is the tail section that gets tore off during a plane crash?
Where is the indestructible landing gear?
All the plane parts found did NOT the match a Boeing 757.
Your claims are full of holes.
Didn't think so

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#260173 Oct 2, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>

Dr. Steven E. Jones"
There are now over 1,700 engineers and architects in the AE911Truth.org society that have proved nothing.

Does that tell you something or do you need a map?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#260174 Oct 2, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup, Even though it was right off a major highway and many people that saw it were civilians, but hey, according to the tin foilers all the FDNY were in on it too.
Only govie shills drive on the freeway at that time of day. LMAO

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#260175 Oct 2, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Well the fact is twoof could pay for independent experts to start this much needed "new investigation" right now by having independent verification of many of their claims which are based on information readily available right now.
As I said yesterday, they could have an independent analysis of the modelling data NIST used to prove their claims that the models were tweaked to get results that showed what NIST wanted.
They could send multiple samples of their twoofer dust to independent labs for analysis for the composition of compounds.
They could have an independent analysis of the fdr data from flight 77 to prove their claims that it shows 77 never hit the Pentagon.
There's all kinds of things twoofer masters like Jones, Gage, Griffin etc could do but instead they just continue to pander to their flock or spend 10's of thousands for bill boards that won't prove 911 was an inside jobbity jobbity jobbity job but may bring more sheep to the flock.
Jeez, when I say it like that it just sounds like a cult!
Huh, eh.
They couldn't do that.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#260178 Oct 2, 2013
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>There are now over 1,700 engineers and architects in the AE911Truth.org society that have proved nothing.

Does that tell you something or do you need a map?
How do they prove anything after the evidence has been ignored and melted down?

Pretty simple question.

Insults Are Easier

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#260179 Oct 2, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>They couldn't do that.
Do you ever have anything to do other than sitting on Topix acting deceitful and insulting?

Insults Are Easier

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#260180 Oct 2, 2013
So in case you missed it Aussy booby, Dudley claims truth only wants billboards, yet heres a letter from Steven E. Jones requesting computer modeling data to peer review NISTs 9/11 probable theory.

"To: Senator Mike Lee (Utah)
From:
Dr. Steven E. Jones
Professor of Physics, Ret.
[address given]

1. The key to good science is independent verification.
2. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was charged by Congress to explain the complete collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11/2001 (the 47-story building that was not hit by a plane).
3. NIST developed a computer model with adjustable parameters to explain the WTC 7 collapse.
4. I request that this WTC7-fall computer model be released immediately in a computer-ready form so that independent testing/verification can proceed. This model was developed using taxpayer funds.
5. In particular, NIST states in their 2008 report,
“The steel was assumed in the FDS model to be thermally-thin, thus, no thermal conductivity was used.” I challenge that assumption, and wish to insert into the computer model the known physical value for thermal conductivity, to see how this changes things.

6. There are now over 1,700 engineers and architects in the AE911Truth.org society, and I am confident that our combined expertise will permit us to perform the independent verification of the NIST WTC7 computer model, once that computer simulation is released in full to us, in computer-ready form.

7. Contact information for NIST:

Sincerely,

Dr. Steven E. Jones"

So why if NIST wants to be peer reviewed, does NIST not release the modeling software and data to be peer reviewed.

Is it because

Insults Are Easier?
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#260181 Oct 3, 2013
When religion tells us "money is the root to all evil" this is what they are talking bout

The Rockefellers control politicians and government employees through secret organizations that they created and manage.
Part 1
&li st=PLE46D90F6E20B0B3F

The Trilateral Commission, the CFR and the Bilderberg Group are all controlled by the Rockefellers. Obama is in league with them.
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch...



“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#260182 Oct 3, 2013
Awwww....poor Ignorance is Bliss!

His religion is being put on the spot and his high priests criticized for being nothing but charlatans!

Yet that's all they are.

1) I wouldn't trust Jones as far as I could throw him after his thermite paper has been reduced to being nothing more than a sham of a religious document meant only to pander to the belief based needs of his flock in having something, anything they can spam all over the Internet in the hopes of bring more sheep into the fold.

2) I posted about a young software (structural software) engineer who filed an FOIA request for modelling data months ago and he got what he requested.

Jones' ploy of not following a simple procedure but making a public demand of an official who couldn't acquiesce to such a demand even if he so desired is about as effective as wandering into your dentists office and demanding he release your pediatrists records on your feet!

And the cultists all say "booo!".

3) The cultists have repeatedly claimed NIST'S reports were not based on evidence yet with all the alleged technological and expert support they have, they can't figure out a way to show, using software I have on my work computer, that their theories are in fact correct.

All the information required to do so exists within the NIST reports. The fact is that the modelling data isn't even required as the report itself and available data on fires, materials, physics is freely available to anyone.

3) Twoof masters have the funds and the ability to prove multiple claims true or false yet oddly leave their sheep to base everything on belief rather than proof that would instantly transform twoof from a a flat earth like joke into something tangible that relevant experts couldn't ignore.

But sheep don't require proof, they just require scripture utilizes by the various street corner Jesus's who stand on the internets intersections asking,

"Have you heard the word of twoof today?".

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#260183 Oct 3, 2013
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>There are now over 1,700 engineers and architects in the AE911Truth.org society that have proved nothing.

Does that tell you something or do you need a map?
Being a BLEEVER he doesn't require proof, just scripture to cite to the non-believers.

go
twoof
gone

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#260184 Oct 3, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>They couldn't do that.
They won't.

Their cash cow depends on nothing more than faith...why do anything more?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#260185 Oct 3, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
So in case you missed it Aussy booby, Dudley claims truth only wants billboards, yet heres a letter from Steven E. Jones requesting computer modeling data to peer review NISTs 9/11 probable theory.

"To: Senator Mike Lee (Utah)
From:
Dr. Steven E. Jones
Professor of Physics, Ret.
[address given]

1. The key to good science is independent verification.
2. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was charged by Congress to explain the complete collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11/2001 (the 47-story building that was not hit by a plane).
3. NIST developed a computer model with adjustable parameters to explain the WTC 7 collapse.
4. I request that this WTC7-fall computer model be released immediately in a computer-ready form so that independent testing/verification can proceed. This model was developed using taxpayer funds.
5. In particular, NIST states in their 2008 report,
“The steel was assumed in the FDS model to be thermally-thin, thus, no thermal conductivity was used.” I challenge that assumption, and wish to insert into the computer model the known physical value for thermal conductivity, to see how this changes things.

6. There are now over 1,700 engineers and architects in the AE911Truth.org society, and I am confident that our combined expertise will permit us to perform the independent verification of the NIST WTC7 computer model, once that computer simulation is released in full to us, in computer-ready form.

7. Contact information for NIST:

Sincerely,

Dr. Steven E. Jones"

So why if NIST wants to be peer reviewed, does NIST not release the modeling software and data to be peer reviewed.

Is it because

Insults Are Easier?
Not billboards, just more mindless sheep like you!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#260186 Oct 3, 2013
Is it just coincidence that twoofers are to a man scientifically illiterate fools who have fallen for other conspiracy theories that can't stand up to scientific scrutiny?

Like moon landing hoax, anti-vaxxers, chem trails...etc.

Is it surprising they fall for unsupported claims like "the towers fell at free fall speed", free fall=cd, molten steel=cd...etc.

Is anyone shocked that as twoofer claims like "the only way to produce iron microspheres is by thermite" are proven false they just ignore that fact and resist the need to re-evaluate their beliefs?

Well, as a cult, twoof doesn't conform to the need for scientific rigour so it shouldn't be surprising or shocking to anyone.
Charlie Sheen

Mount Vernon, KY

#260187 Oct 3, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Only govie shills drive on the freeway at that time of day. LMAO
It's that secret network of NWO tollbooths.
Charlie Sheen

Mount Vernon, KY

#260188 Oct 3, 2013
onemale wrote:
6 weeks later Mohamed Atta stood up and was alive in front of cameras at a Saudi Arabia television station!!
Ever going to link us to this or just another lie of twoof?
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#260189 Oct 3, 2013
U.S SOLDIERS Expose Martial Law Agenda Plans 2013

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#260191 Oct 3, 2013
Newton's third law says that when objects interact, they always exert equal and opposite forces on each other. Therefore, while an object is falling, if it exerts any force on objects in its path, those objects must push back, slowing the fall.

If an object is observed to be in freefall, we can conclude that nothing in the path exerts a force to slow it down, and by Newton's third law, the falling object cannot be pushing on anything else either.

When the top section of a building collapses one would expect the falling section to crash into the lower section and exert a large force on it, like dropping an anvil on your toe. A typical controlled demolition exploits this fact: the crushing force of the falling section of the building contributes to the demolition, and reduces the amount of explosives that are needed. However, amazingly, this is not what happened when Building 7 "collapsed" on 9/11.

We know that the falling section of Building 7 did not crush the lower section of the building because the top section of Building 7 fell at freefall. It didn't just fall at something close to freefall.

It fell for about 2.5 seconds at a rate that was “indistinguishable” from freefall. If the falling section of the building had crushed the lower section, the lower section would have pushed back with an equal but opposite force. But that would have slowed the fall. Since the fall was not slowed in the slightest, we can conclude that the force of interaction was zero... in both directions. It took less than 7 seconds to fall completely mostly into its own footprint in exactly like most controlled demolitions.

Even an uneducated porker pig welder from Canada and a wheelchair bound dis-info artist from the plains of Nebraska can not argue with Sir Isaac Newton even if they claim to be as smart as Galileo.

To keep things in perspective, "freefall" is not a speed because an object in "freefall" is constantly accelerating until it reaches a terminal velocity.

http://911speakout.org/Freefall.pdf

Huh Eh !

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#260194 Oct 3, 2013
Who said it was "a" speed methy?

Insults Are Easier

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#260195 Oct 3, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
Awwww....poor Ignorance is Bliss!

His religion is being put on the spot and his high priests criticized for being nothing but charlatans!

Yet that's all they are.

1) I wouldn't trust Jones as far as I could throw him after his thermite paper has been reduced to being nothing more than a sham of a religious document meant only to pander to the belief based needs of his flock in having something, anything they can spam all over the Internet in the hopes of bring more sheep into the fold.

2) I posted about a young software (structural software) engineer who filed an FOIA request for modelling data months ago and he got what he requested.

Jones' ploy of not following a simple procedure but making a public demand of an official who couldn't acquiesce to such a demand even if he so desired is about as effective as wandering into your dentists office and demanding he release your pediatrists records on your feet!

And the cultists all say "booo!".

3) The cultists have repeatedly claimed NIST'S reports were not based on evidence yet with all the alleged technological and expert support they have, they can't figure out a way to show, using software I have on my work computer, that their theories are in fact correct.

All the information required to do so exists within the NIST reports. The fact is that the modelling data isn't even required as the report itself and available data on fires, materials, physics is freely available to anyone.

3) Twoof masters have the funds and the ability to prove multiple claims true or false yet oddly leave their sheep to base everything on belief rather than proof that would instantly transform twoof from a a flat earth like joke into something tangible that relevant experts couldn't ignore.

But sheep don't require proof, they just require scripture utilizes by the various street corner Jesus's who stand on the internets intersections asking,

"Have you heard the word of twoof today?".
Cool, then perhaps you can post it again or give the guys name and the results.

Your trust of anyone is irrelevant, because you are untrustworthy, Dudley.

Insults Are Easier

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) 1 min VIKING 48,043
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 2 min andet1987 2,015
dried poppy pods (Mar '13) 6 min BobbyReal 33
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 16 min Phooey 646,361
How do I own a forum? 20 min Norm 2
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr VIKING 971,581
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr RiccardoFire 44,641
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 3 hr Rosa_Winkel 105,548
More from around the web