9/11 EXPOSED
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-04-2016, 01:11 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(11-04-2016 01:00 PM)SYZ Wrote:  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.

You can't prove they weren't, and anyway, no competent engineering school has modelled such a thing. But if I use cardboard and washers to represent the unicorns then this youtube video practically proves that someone in the government is lying.

In other words, psikey is defective.

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
12-04-2016, 06:47 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
psikey, get help. You can start by reading "Don Quixote".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-04-2016, 08:49 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(11-04-2016 01:00 PM)SYZ Wrote:  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.

Some people are really dense. Believing and caring are not the same thing. There had to be some kind of conspiracy for two airliners to hit two buildings next to each other within an hour. It could not be coincidence.

But whether or not 200 ton airliners could destroy 400,000 ton buildings and make them come down in less than 30 seconds is physics. Analyzing physics requires data.

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
13-04-2016, 09:24 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(13-04-2016 08:49 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  Some people are really dense.
Quoted for irony. You fucking stupid motherfucker.

Quote:But whether or not 200 ton airliners could destroy 400,000 ton buildings and make them come down in less than 30 seconds is physics. Analyzing physics requires data.
Whereas bitching on internet forums 'cos no one believes your ridiculous made up crapola requires nothing other than a keyboard and a skull harder than diamond.

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
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
13-04-2016, 09:57 AM (This post was last modified: 13-04-2016 03:47 PM by adey67.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
So are you saying you believe in the conspiracy theory but you don't care about the conspiracy theory? You realise how that would give people pause especially as all of the external / non terrorist conspiracy theories are complete bullshit, controlled demolition debunked and impossible. Laser's from space debunked and impossible holographic airplanes debunked and impossible, nano thermite debunked and impossible. Steel losing structural integrity at x number of degrees centigrade (wake up yanks use metric Tongue ) proven. Qed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes adey67's post
13-04-2016, 10:27 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(13-04-2016 08:49 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  There had to be some kind of conspiracy for two airliners to hit two buildings next to each other within an hour. It could not be coincidence.
Well of course there was a conspiracy between the plotters of the attack. Duh. A conspiracy is defined as a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful. The conspiracy you seem to be implying that existed was one between the US government and the terrorists—which is a totally different thing. And absurd.

Quote:But whether or not 200 ton airliners could destroy 400,000 ton buildings and make them come down in less than 30 seconds is physics. Analyzing physics requires data.
The relative masses of the two entities is entirely irrelevant, and indicates that you have very little knowledge of metallurgy, structural engineering and/or physics. You also seem not to understand that both towers effectively demolished themselves—due to their structural insufficiency. The planes were only the catalyst for an inevitable chain reaction of self-destruction, but in and of themselves did not bring the towers down.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes SYZ's post
13-04-2016, 12:27 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(13-04-2016 08:49 AM)psikeyhackr Wrote:  But whether or not 200 ton airliners could destroy 400,000 ton buildings and make them come down in less than 30 seconds is physics. Analyzing physics requires data.

We have data.

We know the temperatures of the fires which spread throughout the towers. We know that these fires were hot enough to weaken the structure of the buildings. This was enough to bring them down. Everything else is frippery.

No one cares about your obsession with precise concrete distributions or your constant attempts to try and act as though the airplane impacts were the cause of collapse.

"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
[+] 3 users Like Unbeliever's post
13-04-2016, 02:58 PM (This post was last modified: 13-04-2016 03:44 PM by adey67.)
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(13-04-2016 09:57 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Great post SYZ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes adey67's post
15-04-2016, 10:33 PM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
(13-04-2016 12:27 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  We know the temperatures of the fires which spread throughout the towers. We know that these fires were hot enough to weaken the structure of the buildings. This was enough to bring them down. Everything else is frippery.

No one cares about your obsession with precise concrete distributions or your constant attempts to try and act as though the airplane impacts were the cause of collapse.

I have already suggested a simulation that makes the temperatures irrelevant.

Quote:My suggested simulation of removing 5 levels makes the fireproofing discussion irrelevant anyway. The fireproofing business is just about collapse initiation. Removing 5 levels would give us collapse. Could the top 15 stories falling on the lower 90 destroy them? That is the question. If they could not then who cares about fireproofing?

A simulation eliminating levels 91 through 95 would create a 60 foot gap which is more damage than airliner impacts and fires could do. Apparently the people running our engineering schools can't think of such a simple simulation much less do one. It should be less complicated than thw Purdue simulation. Lower velocities, fewer materials, no fuel, what is the problem?
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...#pid896642

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
16-04-2016, 04:38 AM
RE: 9/11 EXPOSED
And, as been explained to you before.

Just posting some weird hypothetical in no way reflects the events that happened on the day.

You keep posting that you find the work of people eminently more qualified than yourself to be lacking in explanation... and then turn around and present something else which i no way reflects/represents reality.

Just magically whisking away 5 level amount of floors in a computer model will, in no way, give you the actual answer you seek.

What you are effectively presenting above is a 'Straw man'.

"Oh look! They can't do this thing (Y) so (X) must not be true either!"

Psikeyhackr's response will be.. interesting...

Such is the best descriptive word I can think of. Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: