9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-02-2016, 03:40 AM (This post was last modified: 23-02-2016 03:44 AM by WOPR.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(22-02-2016 05:45 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  For all your theories or "facts"... it didn't prevent the building from falling down when it did, now did it? Instead of wasting your time on the past with a subject the US government will NEVER release the full details of, try protesting the idea of yet another invasion in the middle-east, the domino effect of 9/11; you might actually accomplish something.

So, in the case of a building collapse, since carrying out an analysis of its destruction won't prevent the destruction being analysed, there's no point in carrying out an analysis of its destruction. You guys should be comedy writers.... this is great stuff!

________________WTC7 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION________________
An Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis and Conclusion
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-02-2016, 03:51 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 03:40 AM)WOPR Wrote:  
(22-02-2016 05:45 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  For all your theories or "facts"... it didn't prevent the building from falling down when it did, now did it? Instead of wasting your time on the past with a subject the US government will NEVER release the full details of, try protesting the idea of yet another invasion in the middle-east, the domino effect of 9/11; you might actually accomplish something.

So, in the case of a building collapse, since carrying out an analysis of its destruction won't prevent the destruction being analysed, there's no point in carrying out an analysis of its destruction. You guys should be comedy writers.... this is great stuff!

Where's your peer reviewed analysis then? Easy to write forum posts isn't it?

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
23-02-2016, 04:01 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
Comparing someone to a rat trying to use a screwdriver is somewhat unproductive it doesn't exactly encourage anyone to take your ideas seriously and I mean come on man you seriously think loads of government operatives snuck into both towers placed a shed load of explosives in precise intimate contact with the parts of the building needed in order to achieve controlled demolition in order to murder thousands of their own citizens, and arranged for two planes to be flown into the towers to make it look like mad terrorists did it then you get all pissy when called out on it what the fuck did you expect man, seriously Facepalm
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-02-2016, 04:48 AM (This post was last modified: 23-02-2016 05:40 AM by WOPR.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 03:24 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 01:38 AM)WOPR Wrote:  So.... you think that the Law of Conservation of Energy as applied to a body falling as a single unit actually requires peer review to be reliable.... Hah! It's a rock dropping! That's just riotously funny man! I haven't laughed that hard in a while (I told my brother and he's still cracking up). So.... you think maybe gravitational acceleration is like string theory or black holes or something? Hah! Maybe we should call in Stephen Hawking!

No, you wanker. I think that anyone can make up shit and post it on the internet.

Right.... anyone can make anything up and post it on the internet.

(23-02-2016 03:24 AM)morondog Wrote:  I think that a peer reviewed paper, which if you *are* what you claim, you should know how to write, would be much more convincing than some rambling forum post.

Well, the Law of Conservation of Energy is right up there with 1+1=2 in physics (literally kid stuff), so if you need a peer reviewed paper to be convinced of it you're lost.... it's a rock dropping! Anyone submitting a paper for review with the stated aim of verifying the Law of Conservation of Energy as applied to a body falling as a single unit would be laughed out of the room! The Law of Conservation of Energy hasn't needed any peer review for centuries.... that's why we call it a law you dope.

(23-02-2016 03:24 AM)morondog Wrote:  You are not what you claim however, because a real scientist would know this shit. So you're some basement dwelling fuckhead.

Where did I claim to be a scientist?

________________WTC7 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION________________
An Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis and Conclusion
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-02-2016, 04:55 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
There should be a sign on the door - if you're here, you're already lost. Tongue

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-02-2016, 05:31 AM (This post was last modified: 23-02-2016 05:48 AM by WOPR.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 04:01 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Comparing someone to a rat trying to use a screwdriver is somewhat unproductive it doesn't exactly encourage anyone to take your ideas seriously....

The first response after I posted the analysis was some weirdo talking about big dicks and hamburgers.... You think that was productive?

(23-02-2016 04:01 AM)adey67 Wrote:  ....and I mean come on man you seriously think loads of government operatives snuck into both towers placed a shed load of explosives in precise intimate contact with the parts of the building needed in order to achieve controlled demolition in order to murder thousands of their own citizens, and arranged for two planes to be flown into the towers to make it look like mad terrorists did it then you get all pissy when called out on it what the fuck did you expect man, seriously

I think someone wrote earlier "....physics doesn't care."

________________WTC7 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION________________
An Empirically Verifiable Graphical Target System Analysis and Conclusion
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-02-2016, 06:00 AM (This post was last modified: 23-02-2016 06:12 AM by adey67.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 05:31 AM)WOPR Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 04:01 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Comparing someone to a rat trying to use a screwdriver is somewhat unproductive it doesn't exactly encourage anyone to take your ideas seriously....

The first response after I posted the analysis was some weirdo talking about big dicks and hamburgers.... You think that was productive?

(23-02-2016 04:01 AM)adey67 Wrote:  ....and I mean come on man you seriously think loads of government operatives snuck into both towers placed a shed load of explosives in precise intimate contact with the parts of the building needed in order to achieve controlled demolition in order to murder thousands of their own citizens, and arranged for two planes to be flown into the towers to make it look like mad terrorists did it then you get all pissy when called out on it what the fuck did you expect man, seriously

I think someone wrote earlier "....physics doesn't care."

Yup physics doesn't care that's fine I get that but aren't you are still left with the fact that your physics that doesn't care leaves you tacitly indirectly and possibly unintentionally endorsing the controlled demolition theory ? Also your rat comment was directed at a different poster than the one talking about big dicks and hamburgers so it was still not productive Imo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-02-2016, 06:42 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 05:31 AM)WOPR Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 04:01 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Comparing someone to a rat trying to use a screwdriver is somewhat unproductive it doesn't exactly encourage anyone to take your ideas seriously....

The first response after I posted the analysis was some weirdo talking about big dicks and hamburgers.... You think that was productive?

Nothing is productive in this forum section. Dodgy

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-02-2016, 07:22 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 04:48 AM)WOPR Wrote:  Well, the Law of Conservation of Energy is right up there with 1+1=2 in physics (literally kid stuff), so if you need a peer reviewed paper to be convinced of it you're lost.... it's a rock dropping! Anyone submitting a paper for review with the stated aim of verifying the Law of Conservation of Energy as applied to a body falling as a single unit would be laughed out of the room! The Law of Conservation of Energy hasn't needed any peer review for centuries.... that's why we call it a law you dope.

You're the dope. You're asserting a lot more than just the correctness of the "Law of Conservation of Energy". Give me a peer reviewed paper containing the conclusion that WTC7 was a controlled demolition. Dickhead.

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
23-02-2016, 08:04 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 03:40 AM)WOPR Wrote:  
(22-02-2016 05:45 AM)ELK12695 Wrote:  For all your theories or "facts"... it didn't prevent the building from falling down when it did, now did it? Instead of wasting your time on the past with a subject the US government will NEVER release the full details of, try protesting the idea of yet another invasion in the middle-east, the domino effect of 9/11; you might actually accomplish something.

So, in the case of a building collapse, since carrying out an analysis of its destruction won't prevent the destruction being analysed, there's no point in carrying out an analysis of its destruction. You guys should be comedy writers.... this is great stuff!

Yeah, that was pretty brilliant! The circularity of the 9/11 Religion.

Even if I believed airliners could do that I would expect the full release of information on the buildings.

psik

Physics is Phutile
Fiziks is Fundamental
Since 9/11 Fiziks has been History
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: