9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-04-2016, 12:35 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(09-04-2016 01:24 PM)SYZ Wrote:  Two mistakes you make with this... You have no empirical evidence of any conspiracy,

So you are simply demonstrating that you do not understand what I said or do not care what I said.

My point is that ALL THAT MATTERS IS PHYSICS. All conspiracies are IRRELEVANT. I am not looking for any evidence of any conspiracies.

If airliner impacts doing structural damage and starting fires could totally destroy the buildings then it should not be difficult to prove. But it would require complete and accurate data on the buildings. So what is wrong with that?

But if it is proven that an airliner could not destroy the north tower then there would be serious problems. The 9/11 Affair is a scientific travesty no matter what the truth is. If it is proven that airliners could not have destroyed the towers then I would not be in the least bit interested in who did it. I would only care about why our engineering schools did not address this issue in 2002.

[59,218]
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
10-04-2016, 12:51 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
All that matters is the physics huh? Then why don't you demonstrate your amazing understanding of the physics and write a paper?

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
10-04-2016, 01:13 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
At work.

A WHOLE lot of 'If' in that last post Psikeyhackr.

What 'If' a plane hit each building?

Are you positing that a plane did not impact each building?

Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
10-04-2016, 02:08 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(10-04-2016 01:13 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

A WHOLE lot of 'If' in that last post Psikeyhackr.

What 'If' a plane hit each building?

Are you positing that a plane did not impact each building?

Consider

What did I say to indicate a plane did not hit each building? The analysis of the south tower would have to be different because even the NIST admitted that the top tilted "20 to 25 degrees". But the NIST says nothing about the center of gravity of that tilted top portion. So it goes back to the scientific incompetence.

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
10-04-2016, 02:25 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(10-04-2016 02:08 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(10-04-2016 01:13 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

A WHOLE lot of 'If' in that last post Psikeyhackr.

What 'If' a plane hit each building?

Are you positing that a plane did not impact each building?

Consider

What did I say to indicate a plane did not hit each building? The analysis of the south tower would have to be different because even the NIST admitted that the top tilted "20 to 25 degrees". But the NIST says nothing about the center of gravity of that tilted top portion. So it goes back to the scientific incompetence.

psik

If you're so competent, write a paper. Otherwise stop being a fuckhead.

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
10-04-2016, 02:34 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
At work.

(10-04-2016 02:08 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(10-04-2016 01:13 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

A WHOLE lot of 'If' in that last post Psikeyhackr.

What 'If' a plane hit each building?

Are you positing that a plane did not impact each building?

Consider

What did I say to indicate a plane did not hit each building? The analysis of the south tower would have to be different because even the NIST admitted that the top tilted "20 to 25 degrees". But the NIST says nothing about the center of gravity of that tilted top portion. So it goes back to the scientific incompetence.

psik

Okay.

So, planes DID impact the towers.

There WERE fires caused by av-gas, papers etc....

The towers DID collapse.

What is your point beyond these facts, Psikeyhackr?

Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
10-04-2016, 09:43 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(10-04-2016 02:34 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  At work.

(10-04-2016 02:08 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  What did I say to indicate a plane did not hit each building? The analysis of the south tower would have to be different because even the NIST admitted that the top tilted "20 to 25 degrees". But the NIST says nothing about the center of gravity of that tilted top portion. So it goes back to the scientific incompetence.

psik

Okay.

So, planes DID impact the towers.

There WERE fires caused by av-gas, papers etc....

The towers DID collapse.

What is your point beyond these facts, Psikeyhackr?

Consider

That all of it wasn't enough to explain his anomaly hunting, which would require additional factors and the involvement of a conspiracy that he both wont fess up to backing nor has evidence in support of.

[Image: tysonism-on-conspiracy-theories.jpg]

Almost 200 pages in and psik is still no better off than this. Which is probably for the best, lest assassins in the employ of conspirators willing and capable of so much death and the subsequent cover-up actually come for him.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
10-04-2016, 11:39 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(10-04-2016 09:43 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Which is probably for the best, lest assassins in the employ of conspirators willing and capable of so much death and the subsequent cover-up actually come for him.

He's more use out there being a live example of the kind of stupid person who would believe such a ridiculous tale and convincing people that nothing happened, that's why they left him alone.

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
11-04-2016, 10:49 AM (This post was last modified: 11-04-2016 10:53 AM by adey67.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(10-04-2016 12:35 PM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  
(09-04-2016 01:24 PM)SYZ Wrote:  Two mistakes you make with this... You have no empirical evidence of any conspiracy,

So you are simply demonstrating that you do not understand what I said or do not care what I said.

My point is that ALL THAT MATTERS IS PHYSICS. All conspiracies are IRRELEVANT. I am not looking for any evidence of any conspiracies.

If airliner impacts doing structural damage and starting fires could totally destroy the buildings then it should not be difficult to prove. But it would require complete and accurate data on the buildings. So what is wrong with that?

But if it is proven that an airliner could not destroy the north tower then there would be serious problems. The 9/11 Affair is a scientific travesty no matter what the truth is. If it is proven that airliners could not have destroyed the towers then I would not be in the least bit interested in who did it. I would only care about why our engineering schools did not address this issue in 2002.

[59,218]
psik
Nooooo !!!! Please !!!! I can stomach alternative opinions even cranky ones but to suggest conspiracies are irrelevant and the hiding behind physics and pretending things are sane when they're not just so wrong on all levels this insanely narrow cookie cutter just went from cranky nut job to total loonsvile.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-04-2016, 01:00 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
So psikeyhackr doesn't believe that there's a conspiracy involved with 9/11, nor does he believe in the accepted mechanics or physics of the WTC collapses.

The only conclusion then can be that the towers were hit with an airborne herd of invisible, fire-breathing pink unicorns normally stabled on Planet X, or Nibiru—which unsurprisingly is also invisible.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like SYZ's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: