9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-02-2016, 12:30 PM (This post was last modified: 23-02-2016 12:36 PM by adey67.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 12:05 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 09:24 AM)adey67 Wrote:  I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how rejection of the aircraft causing the collapse of the towers can be anything other than a sulbliminal tacit endorsement of the controlled demolition theory.

"Subliminal" means you are dealing with psychological BS. If the physics of experiments shows collapse is possible then what is the problem? Are some people just afraid that demolition might be more than a theory?

psik
I think we should all be majorly afraid of that but its so unlikely to my mind especially given the ineptitude of the American government at that time it was even a huge joke in the UK. At the risk of being offensive I think folks would need to be majorly mentally retarded to even consider controlled demolition as an option / explanation for the towers collapse, its too huge too impossible to keep quiet and how do you get folks to fly aircraft into buildings for you unless you are promised the Islamic 72 virgins with tight willing pussies waiting for you ? I mean its not like you can bribe them with money or anything else for that matter so they sure as shit were not working for the USA.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-02-2016, 01:05 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 12:30 PM)adey67 Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 12:05 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  "Subliminal" means you are dealing with psychological BS. If the physics of experiments shows collapse is possible then what is the problem? Are some people just afraid that demolition might be more than a theory?

psik
I think we should all be majorly afraid of that but its so unlikely to my mind especially given the ineptitude of the American government at that time it was even a huge joke in the UK. At the risk of being offensive I think folks would need to be majorly mentally retarded to even consider controlled demolition as an option / explanation for the towers collapse, its too huge too impossible to keep quiet and how do you get folks to fly aircraft into buildings for you unless you are promised the Islamic 72 virgins with tight willing pussies waiting for you ? I mean its not like you can bribe them with money or anything else for that matter so they sure as shit were not working for the USA.

But that assumes there is not a more competent organization behind the government that pulls its strings. The Republicans and Democrats might be mostly charade for the suckers.

Forget the government and who did it. Follow the physics.

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
23-02-2016, 01:20 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 01:05 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  Follow the physics.

psik

Then why don't you?

Why do you put up barriers to what qualifies as a test based on physical models vs computer models. I still haven't seen what your proclaimed actual meaningful answer to this is.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
23-02-2016, 03:08 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 01:20 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 01:05 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  Follow the physics.

psik

Then why don't you?

Why do you put up barriers to what qualifies as a test based on physical models vs computer models. I still haven't seen what your proclaimed actual meaningful answer to this is.

I do not know what you mean by that. Won't physical models and computer models have to be based on accurate data about whatever is being modeled? So neither one can be made without that information. That is why I talk about the NIST not providing the amount of concrete in the towers and the distributions of steel and concrete down the buildings.

[50,287]
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
23-02-2016, 03:22 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 03:08 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 01:20 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Then why don't you?

Why do you put up barriers to what qualifies as a test based on physical models vs computer models. I still haven't seen what your proclaimed actual meaningful answer to this is.

I do not know what you mean by that. Won't physical models and computer models have to be based on accurate data about whatever is being modeled? So neither one can be made without that information. That is why I talk about the NIST not providing the amount of concrete in the towers and the distributions of steel and concrete down the buildings.

[50,287]
psik

Models do not incorporate every scintilla of information, they are simplified so as to be tractable.

Given every iota of those data, what will you do with them? Consider

You don't appear to have the knowledge or skills to make use of the data.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2016, 01:04 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(23-02-2016 12:05 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 09:24 AM)adey67 Wrote:  I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how rejection of the aircraft causing the collapse of the towers can be anything other than a sulbliminal tacit endorsement of the controlled demolition theory.

"Subliminal" means you are dealing with psychological BS. If the physics of experiments shows collapse is possible then what is the problem? Are some people just afraid that demolition might be more than a theory?

psik

It only took you 160 pages to show your true colours, which are as predictable and shite as we thought. Well done.

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
24-02-2016, 11:36 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(22-02-2016 11:25 PM)WOPR Wrote:  I was going to get a thrashing anywhere it should have been at that link in my signature, the Cambridge University sponsored science forum and podcast TheNakedScientists. The analysis was posted there about a year and a half ago with 50,000 views now and there hasn't been even one posted objection to any part of it.

I did look at it. Your theories got spanked. Repeatedly.

Shall I post screenshots or quotes?

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2016, 11:57 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(24-02-2016 11:36 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(22-02-2016 11:25 PM)WOPR Wrote:  I was going to get a thrashing anywhere it should have been at that link in my signature, the Cambridge University sponsored science forum and podcast TheNakedScientists. The analysis was posted there about a year and a half ago with 50,000 views now and there hasn't been even one posted objection to any part of it.

I did look at it. Your theories got spanked. Repeatedly.

Shall I post screenshots or quotes?

Por que no los dos?

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2016, 12:22 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(24-02-2016 11:57 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(24-02-2016 11:36 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  I did look at it. Your theories got spanked. Repeatedly.

Shall I post screenshots or quotes?

Por que no los dos?

I was going to, but it's not worth the effort. (FWIW, it's not a long thread, 6 pages or so.) In any case, the thread OP starts off sneaky-like, asking general questions on free fall. After trying to correct the scientists who are attempting to answer his questions, the OP moves from free fall to building demolition to WTC.

Now admittedly, he does adjust bits of his theory to accommodate some of the disagreements. But at the end his conspiracy theory does not convince anyone and is challenged repeatedly.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-02-2016, 01:54 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(24-02-2016 01:04 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(23-02-2016 12:05 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  "Subliminal" means you are dealing with psychological BS. If the physics of experiments shows collapse is possible then what is the problem? Are some people just afraid that demolition might be more than a theory?

psik

It only took you 160 pages to show your true colours, which are as predictable and shite as we thought. Well done.

And how many pages will it take you to learn what the word "might" means?

If airliners and fire did it, why should the people who say so object to experiments to verify it?

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: