Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

54,468 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#260510 Oct 8, 2013
Pegasus wrote:
<quoted text>But zipperhead you don't have a molecule of proof as to a cruise missile isn't that so.
I thought so.
A missile would have gone all the way through the building and out into the courtyard.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#260511 Oct 8, 2013
The biggest problem is not the missile. Where did flight 77 go if not into the Pentagon? There is no plausible scenario.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#260512 Oct 8, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
"The plane was going 733.33 feet per second. That was more than enough speed to fold the wings. The engines are attached too the wings and had no problem passing through the wall of windows."
Engines attached too (sic) the wings and had No problem passing through the wall of windows like magic without making so much as a mark.
Fantastic!?!?!?
"Enough speed to fold the wings"
At the fuselage the wings are bigger, front to back, than the hole in the front facade of the building.
If the wings folded and went in the rabbit hole you said it they must still be in there.
Got any pictures of the wings and the engines and the tail section inside the magic rabbit hole you say they went into? In short the entire Boeing 757 went in that hole and nobody took any pictures?
Well of course, how could they? The whole thing is a fabrication of the first order.
wasted water, you are an imbecile and a credit to your govie employers, who are also imbeciles.
You DO believe in majik don't you! KEWL Dude LOL
Huh eh !
No plane parts?

http://www.google.com/imgres...

This doesn't look like airplane damage?

http://www.google.com/imgres...

This looks like a missile? Really?

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence...

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#260513 Oct 8, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>So in order for that to be a lie , you would have to show steel has never been plated with less corrosive metal and then been involved in a building fire.

Try using logic, Dudley, its a heck of a time saver not needing to look for links on the internet.

Link or Think

Insults Are Easier
Wow!

Now your introducing corrosion into a lie you just can't support (because it was a lie to begin with) and trying to play the fallacious game of shifting the burden of proof to me because you can't produce what you claimed exists.

And lets have a closer look at your new little train wreck of scientific illiteracy.

"you would have to show steel has never been plated with less corrosive metal and then been involved in a building fire"

Say what!?

Really?

So in the Looniverse you call home, in order for me to support my already supported position I would have to show steel has never been plated with a "less corrosive metal"????? and then involved in a building fire?????

Well lets see dummy. My twoofer gibberish to English translator says you're attempting to say that steel has been plated with another metal or alloy which has better corrosion resistance than structural steel itself.

Of course that's one of the purposes of plating so it's quite obviously true.

Then you go on to say "that hasn't been involved in a building fire".
Well I'm sure plated steel has been involved in a building fire dippy but that doesn't support your idiocy that you were referencing articles stating there were reports of plated steel melting in a fire so not only is your point lost but your attempt at logic failed you miserably.

The plating would make no difference to the melting point of the steel twoof drone...do you not understand that.

Rhetorical question, it doesn't matter since you're just trying to cover for a previous lie you told.
Pegasus

United States

#260514 Oct 8, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
A missile would have gone all the way through the building and out into the courtyard.
For sure.

They yelp about the aircrafts differing damage upon impact but forget about the difference in the density of what they hit.
Pegasus

United States

#260515 Oct 8, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow!
Now your introducing corrosion into a lie you just can't support (because it was a lie to begin with) and trying to play the fallacious game of shifting the burden of proof to me because you can't produce what you claimed exists.
And lets have a closer look at your new little train wreck of scientific illiteracy.
"you would have to show steel has never been plated with less corrosive metal and then been involved in a building fire"
Say what!?
Really?
So in the Looniverse you call home, in order for me to support my already supported position I would have to show steel has never been plated with a "less corrosive metal"????? and then involved in a building fire?????
Well lets see dummy. My twoofer gibberish to English translator says you're attempting to say that steel has been plated with another metal or alloy which has better corrosion resistance than structural steel itself.
Of course that's one of the purposes of plating so it's quite obviously true.
Then you go on to say "that hasn't been involved in a building fire".
Well I'm sure plated steel has been involved in a building fire dippy but that doesn't support your idiocy that you were referencing articles stating there were reports of plated steel melting in a fire so not only is your point lost but your attempt at logic failed you miserably.
The plating would make no difference to the melting point of the steel twoof drone...do you not understand that.
Rhetorical question, it doesn't matter since you're just trying to cover for a previous lie you told.
In his hast in trying to make us focus on melt points he sprinkles the moot issue of corrosive resistance.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#260516 Oct 8, 2013
Pegasus wrote:
<quoted text>For sure.
They yelp about the aircrafts differing damage upon impact but forget about the difference in the density of what they hit.
Very true. Hitting something at high speed makes a difference. Velocity is everything. The harder object becomes geometrically stronger compared too the weaker object.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#260517 Oct 8, 2013
Pegasus wrote:
<quoted text>In his hast in trying to make us focus on melt points he sprinkles the moot issue of corrosive resistance.
I wonder, is corrosive resistance caused by Twoofer Dust?
Pegasus

Philadelphia, PA

#260518 Oct 8, 2013
I wonder what happens to a pratt and whitney....GE......or rolls royce jet engine when its titanium compressor vanes cranking away at 10-15,000 rpms suddenly comes to a CRASHING stop .
I would guess maybe the explosion would be like a concrete truck full of low intensity explosives.

Truthers can you say pretty good explosion.

“Kenyan-born Obama=Antichrist”

Since: Sep 09

Casper, WY

#260519 Oct 8, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Just like you believe the official story that says, all eight black boxes were destroyed but paper and plastic survives, which is impossible. This puts your creditability in the dumpster.
Plus one of the "terrorist's" boarding pass was found in the rubble in almost pristine condition after the CIA guy singed it w/his lighter. Impeach the Kenyan-born Antichrist!
Pegasus

Philadelphia, PA

#260520 Oct 8, 2013
WelbyMD wrote:
<quoted text>Plus one of the "terrorist's" boarding pass was found in the rubble in almost pristine condition after the CIA guy singed it w/his lighter. Impeach the Kenyan-born Antichrist!
I noticed you stated rubble?.........hmmmmm, you should be careful because your itinerary strickly refers to rubble as pulverized concrete.

You're slippin there Achmed.
Pegasus

Philadelphia, PA

#260521 Oct 8, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
The biggest problem is not the missile. Where did flight 77 go if not into the Pentagon? There is no plausible scenario.
Its still flying around according Jones.........that guys got more stories than Walt Disney.
onemale

Pana, IL

#260522 Oct 8, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
A missile would have gone all the way through the building and out into the courtyard.
WOW, now you're a missle expert.
onemale

Pana, IL

#260523 Oct 8, 2013
Pegasus wrote:
I wonder what happens to a pratt and whitney....GE......or rolls royce jet engine when its titanium compressor vanes cranking away at 10-15,000 rpms suddenly comes to a CRASHING stop .
I would guess maybe the explosion would be like a concrete truck full of low intensity explosives.
Truthers can you say pretty good explosion.
It is especially amazing how these engines didn't even break the windows where they should have hit at the Pentagon, but idiots on here try to tell us they folded and disappeared in the rabbit hole.
onemale

Pana, IL

#260524 Oct 8, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
500 mph and aluminum which one can cut with a table saw blade made for pine.
Amazing, now you're a metal cutting expert.
As a former machinist, it depends on the type of metal you are cutting and the type of cutter you are using. If you try to run the tooling too fast then the tooling gets too hot and dulls quickly.
You can BS people some of the time but all the people all the time, especially 23 years of metal cutting experience.
onemale

Pana, IL

#260525 Oct 8, 2013
Pegasus wrote:
<quoted text>I noticed you stated rubble?.........hmmmmm, you should be careful because your itinerary strickly refers to rubble as pulverized concrete.
You're slippin there Achmed.
They told us they pulled several pieces of paper from the ruble of the crash by Shanksville. Everything else pretty much disintegrated, the plane wings, titanium engines, indestructible landing gears, passengers, luggage pretty much everything but numerous pieces of paper survives.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#260526 Oct 9, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
So the 125 feet wingspan of the Boeing 757 would (give or take a bit for the wings snapping off) have made a hole, about 177 feet wide, in the Pentagon wall. This clearly did not happen.
So, I think it is safe to say that although the hole in the Pentagon wall appears to have been made by an aircraft, it is in fact, too small, to have been made by a Boeing 757.
Reel Guud debwunking pig.
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2...
I know you're too damned dumb to realise it oh elevator boy-sheep 20 pilots STREET CORNER JEEBUS but it was a perfect debunking of your idiot bretheren, Ignorance is Bliss. He claimed the entrance hole was less than 20' and a twoofer source no less shows it was much, much more.

96' according to them and given the composite, that looks quite close.

The wingspan was 125' and the plane came in obliquely at about a 30-40 degree angle.

The fact that the twoofy source claims it should have been a 175' foot hole is unsupported...but your idiocy about the size of the hole and where the engines struck/went is dead.

Good luck with that!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#260527 Oct 9, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
These memes function primarily on a subconscious level.
They are reinforced through repetition, and bypass rational argument.
Memes spread through reinforcement.

Building 7 was not hit by a plane,

The fact that no steel high-rise has ever collapsed from fires,
Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!

Thanks for that self debunking moron!

Oh elevator boy-sheep 20 pilots STREET CORNER JEEBUS!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#260528 Oct 9, 2013
Pegasus wrote:
<quoted text>Lmao.......he follows science alright, the junk science that knows no Alex Jones bounds....
Can you imagine fat boy as a science teacher???

My god, a generation of cavemen that don't understand gravity but scream at the drop of a hat!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#260529 Oct 9, 2013
Pegasus wrote:
<quoted text>For sure.

They yelp about the aircrafts differing damage upon impact but forget about the difference in the density of what they hit.
They just don't care about rational science based arguments in twooferdumb.

If they did, they'd cease being twoofers.

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 min Buck Crick 854,384
The Christian Atheist debate 9 min Lbj 858
There is Everything Wrong with Abortion (Nov '07) 16 min Grunt56 221,817
No one should blaspheme Prophet Mohammad, peace... 17 min RiccardoFire 645
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 19 min Anon 444,246
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 21 min June VanDerMark 596,083
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 23 min RiccardoFire 40,692
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 4 hr Epiphany2 612,606
More from around the web