9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-03-2015, 02:51 AM (This post was last modified: 07-03-2015 05:55 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
The Conspiracy Theory is the klaxon call of those who lack sufficient evidence for their preferred conclusion.

The best available evidence says that 9-11 was not an inside job, and until there is better evidence in support of an alternate theory that explains all of the evidence better than the current one (terrorism), all other competing explanations are necessarily rendered less probable by the current state of the evidence.

You cannot build a competing explanation by cherry-picking supposed anomalies or perceived explanatory gaps, unless you can also account for the entirety of the evidence better than the current leading explanation. No alternate explanation proposed by 'conspiracy theorist' have come remotely close, and are more akin to creationism rather than evolution, in their ability to explain all the known facts.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like EvolutionKills's post
07-03-2015, 02:31 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Every last bit of evidence that proves that 9/11 was NOT a conspiracy was created by people paid by the government to create that evidence in the first place!


Your move TTA forums lol!


My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-03-2015, 02:42 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(07-03-2015 02:31 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  Every last bit of evidence that proves that 9/11 was NOT a conspiracy was created by people paid by the government to create that evidence in the first place!


Your move TTA forums lol!

Conspiracy theory was created by government as honey-trap to lure tinfoil hat-wearers into the open where they can be darted and transported to a secure facility. Lol.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
07-03-2015, 02:47 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(07-03-2015 02:42 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(07-03-2015 02:31 PM)Shadow Fox Wrote:  Every last bit of evidence that proves that 9/11 was NOT a conspiracy was created by people paid by the government to create that evidence in the first place!


Your move TTA forums lol!

Conspiracy theory was created by government as honey-trap to lure tinfoil hat-wearers into the open where they can be darted and transported to a secure facility. Lol.





My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEkRdbq...rLEz-0jEHQ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-03-2015, 06:59 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Is that the new meme, "Available Evidence"?

ROFL

What is the AVAILABLE EVIDENCE on the total amount of concrete in the towers? How does anyone scientifically analyze the so called collapse without data that simple? To hell with conspiracies! Do the physics! Potential Energy is mass times height times the force of gravity. If the amount of steel and concrete varied among the different levels of the north tower then the potential energy of the tower cannot be computed without steel and concrete data on every level. Does it take 13 years for "scientific" atheists to learn this?

The 10,000 page NIST report admits in three places that they needed weight distribution data to analyze the effects of the impact. The south tower deflected 15 inches due to the aircraft impact. What does that have to do with any conspiracies? But then the NIST never even specifies the total amount of concrete in the towers, much less the distribution.

Fiziks is Fundamental! Do the physics first to figure out the what before going off on who and why.

psik
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-03-2015, 07:03 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
LOL

So is there some limit to how many negative votes I can get before I turn into a pumpkin or something.

psik
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-03-2015, 07:05 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(07-03-2015 07:03 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  LOL

So is there some limit to how many negative votes I can get before I turn into a pumpkin or something.

psik

Unfortunately, no.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
07-03-2015, 07:22 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(07-02-2015 07:47 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  When you say 'building a model'? Are you, perchance, talking about computer simulating things? Or... actually building a model of something to test ideas?

Any reasonably accurate physical model and a decent computer model should behave in very similar manners.

But they must both be built according to the same data. So if we do not have accurate data we can't do either one.

Look at the supposed "scientific simulation" done by Purdue.

Quote:"To estimate the serious damage to the World Trade Center core columns, we assembled a detailed numerical model of the impacting aircraft as well as a detailed numerical model of the top 20 stories of the building," Sozen says. "We then used weeks of supercomputer time over a number of years to simulate the event in many credible angles of impact of the aircraft."
http://www.purdue.edu/uns/x/2007a/070612...nnWTC.html

If you watch the video there is no horizontal movement of the core columns due to the impact.

But the NIST has a graph of the deflection and oscillation of the south tower at the 70th floor which was 11 floors below where the plane impacted. But Purdue's simulation only goes 6 stories below where the aircraft impacted the north tower. A "scientific simulation" of the building even though empirical data from the NIST demonstrates that more of the building had to have been affected. Moving that much mass takes energy. So where did Purdue's simulation send the energy that did not move their simulated piece of a building?

The trouble with computer models is that they do not actually do physics. They do calculations to simulate physics. A physical model does real physics, but has problems due to the square cube law and strength of materials. But since this was dealt with in 4 months in the case of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge model why can't it be handled in 13 years when we have way better electronic computers. Oh yeah, they didn't have electronic computers in 1940.

psik

PS - I emailed Sozen at Purdue. No response.[/quote]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-03-2015, 08:42 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(06-03-2015 10:18 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(06-03-2015 09:40 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  All right. So what is you opinion on the matter? Do you have education/knowledge in fields which give you better insight into the events?

Hey new forum weirdo Smile Please address this question. Thanks Smile

^

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-03-2015, 08:47 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(07-03-2015 07:22 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  PS - I emailed Sozen at Purdue. No response.

Must be because he's scared of answering questions. Can't possibly be because every other fucking crank from Buttfuck Nowhere, America has been sending him stupid emails.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: