Conspiracy Theory

[?Impact]

3 minutes ago, hot enough said:

WTC7 fell at free speed, molten/vaporized steel, ... 

I thought the purpose of this thread was to discuss the conspiracy theories so they don't crowd out the scientific issues. That is why I have stayed out of here, even though you tried to bring me in via the OP. Why are you now trying to bring in issues that have been debunked in the other thread?

[Argus]

1 hour ago, betsy said:

Isn't this thread similar to the other one?

Yes, and worthy of being ignored by all sane people, just like the other one.

[Altai]

1 hour ago, ?Impact said:

I thought the purpose of this thread was to discuss the conspiracy theories so they don't crowd out the scientific issues. That is why I have stayed out of here, even though you tried to bring me in via the OP. Why are you now trying to bring in issues that have been debunked in the other thread?

Sorry but you didnt debunked anything in the other thread. All of my questions are still hanging in the air. You or any other posters could not give logical explanations. 

[dre]

Are y

2 hours ago, hot enough said:

They didn't. They blew [no pun intended] many things, most notably using an explosive that was only accessible to the US government/military. 

Are you claiming that thermite is only available to the US military? Because it is used by private companies for a number of civilian applications.

[hot enough]

34 minutes ago, dre said:

 

Are you claiming that thermite is only available to the US military? Because it is used by private companies for a number of civilian applications.

Thermite is available to you and me, dre. Nanothermite is not. This is a superthermite developed by Lawrence Livermore Labs in the 1990s, non-commercially available high grade military explosive. That most certainly should not have been at WTC.

But even if it was ordinary thermite it most certainly should not have been at WTC.

[?Impact]

41 minutes ago, dre said:

Are you claiming that thermite is only available to the US military? Because it is used by private companies for a number of civilian applications.

The claim is about super thermite, where the component metallic elements are not simply ground down to fine particles but made using a special process that is fairly expensive so it is assumed that only the military could do it in volume. Nobody however has answered what the volume would be, and how much it would cost. More important how that could be put in the WTC, and how it magically escaped being ignited by the fires until the magical time of controlled demolition. There is no great secret in how nano particles are created, but it does involve some precise process control so not likely to be done in your average garage. Basically the metal is heated very quickly beyond melting point, but not quite to boiling point so it is liquified. By passing an inert gas across the heating element at the right volume and pressure the rate of evaporation is carefully controlled so very fine particles are created before they cool and solidify. That is a very high level simplified description, but the point is that you would need to build very specialized equipment and to do that in any sort of volume it would be expensive. 

Edited March 8, 2017 by ?Impact

[hot enough]

4 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Opinions mean everything.  Where would we be without them?

More intelligent, more mentally discerning, more scientific, more competent, more rational, more ... .

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, hot enough said:

More intelligent, more mentally discerning, more scientific, more competent, more rational, more ... .

Not even close.  Your opinions seem to confirm that such is not the case.

As in, what's your opinion of how the planes got to New York?

Edited March 8, 2017 by bcsapper

[hot enough]

5 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

so not likely to be done in your average garage.

Or in a cave in Afghanistan. Or concocted by alleged hijackers in a garage, cave, apartment, ... .

 

Its presence at WTC tells it all. 

[hot enough]

7 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Not even close.  Your opinions seem to confirm that such is not the case.

My opinion is of you and the rest of the folks who have not offered anything remotely intelligent, with the exception of Impact, dre, Altai, and if I've missed the odd other, I apologize to them.

Impact is simply a grand deceiver though, so you can't trust much of what he says.

Edited March 8, 2017 by hot enough

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, hot enough said:

My opinion is of you and the rest of the folks who have not offered anything remotely intelligent, with the exception of Impact, dre, Altai, and if I've missed the odd other, I apologize to them.

Impact is simply a grand deceiver though, so you can't trust much of what he says.

What about your opinion of how the planes got to New York? You didn't say.

[?Impact]

13 minutes ago, hot enough said:

Its presence at WTC tells it all. 

It's alleged presence... or is not the grand deceiver allowed to hold those making the allegations to the same standard that they want to hold others to? How about to only a small fraction of that standard?

b.t.w. I watched one of Gage's propaganda films last night, I see where you got your brainwashing from. About 25% of the film was about how people can't accept different views, but of course he doesn't tell you that also must apply to his crackpot theories as well. 

[dre]

5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

What about your opinion of how the planes got to New York? You didn't say.

Also there enough cellphone calls to family members and friends by people on those planes, that its pretty clear there WAS a highjacking. So one has to wonder... if you had "super thermite" planted in the towers, traces of which will obviously be discovered later, then why bother with the elaborate and risky project to highjack airliners at all? One that requires your own operatives to forfeit their lives, and involves a good chance of them getting caught.

I think if Hot Enough put his own theory under the same microscope that hes applying to the official account, he would also find his own theory implausible or improbable.

I think there WAS a coverup. I think that the government heavily redacted all the reports to protect their friends in the middle east, and prevent those relationships from coming under scrutiny which might result in the disclosure of some of the OTHER nasty shit Uncle Sam is doing around the world. But I dont see any compelling evidence at all that suggests direct involvement in the planning or execution. Its just not there.

[hot enough]

35 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

It's alleged presence...

This is highly illustrative of your deep dishonesty. Go and retrieve the study so that dre and others won't discover that you are just like R, D, W, B, ... . 

[hot enough]

41 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

b.t.w. I watched one of Gage's propaganda films last night, I see where you got your brainwashing from. About 25% of the film was about how people can't accept different views, but of course he doesn't tell you that also must apply to his crackpot theories as well. 

And don't forget Professor Hulsey, the 3,000 plus architects and engineers, all the firemen, lawyers, scholars, pilots, ... . 

But you expect us to believe you, Mr Dishonest, the person who leaves every topic that frightens him untouched. The person who never provides any source, any links, anything to support his wacky notions. 

[?Impact]

1 minute ago, hot enough said:

This is highly illustrative of your deep dishonesty. Go and retrieve the study so that dre and others won't discover that you are just like R, D, W, B, ... . 

If you are talking about Harrit's 2009 paper, then that has already been discussed in detail. Write your Congressman and ask them to fund NIST to reopen an investigation into what will likely turn out to be chips of paint that were applied to a structure 50 years ago. Will you guarantee however if that is the result then you, Gage, and all the truthers will forever hold your peace? Perhaps first Gage & Harritt should step up and defend their many failures.

2 minutes ago, hot enough said:

And don't forget Professor Hulsey

Well remind me when he actually publishes something on the topic.

[hot enough]

21 minutes ago, dre said:

Also there enough cellphone calls to family members and friends by people on those planes,

Never happened. After you read the full discussion at the link below, click on "Next Point" to take you to the next.

 

Quote

Given the pivotal importance of this call in starting the “war on terror,” these problems, like the problems in the Barbara Olson story, show the evidentiary basis for this “war” to have been as weak as the evidence for the “weapons of mass destruction” in starting the Iraq “war.” [25]

http://www.consensus911.org/point-pc-1/

 

[taxme]

6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Alleged hijackers didn't do what?  Exactly what?  They did take flying lessons, board the planes, hijack them and fly them into buildings, right? 

The lie is that they took lessons flying small aircraft, not big commercial airliners.There was no way they were able to just go to some airport, and start to learn how to fly one of those big birds and takeoff up and down on the airport runways. So, the lie is now your proof that this was a planned conspiracy. Believe it or not.   

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, taxme said:

The lie is that they took lessons flying small aircraft, not big commercial airliners.There was no way they were able to just go to some airport, and start to learn how to fly one of those big birds and takeoff up and down on the airport runways. So, the lie is now your proof that this was a planned conspiracy. Believe it or not.   

I don't think they took off.  I think they relied on the actual pilots for that.

 

Edited March 8, 2017 by bcsapper

[?Impact]

7 minutes ago, taxme said:

The lie is that they took lessons flying small aircraft, not big commercial airliners.

The principals are the same. The location of relevant controls and displays for the specific plane can be easily researched. They were not interested in all the complex issues involved in flying, just in being able to turn off transponders, minor daytime navigation, and the very basics of flight. They were not interested in takeoff and landing, the most involved parts of flying.

I don`t know if anyone has studied their flights to see if they were following landmark navigation. While neither of the two flights into the WTC had their flight data recorder or cockpit voice recorder recovered, there should be enough radar tracks both with and without the transponder to see if they were turning at major landmarks.

[taxme]

On 3/7/2017 at 1:42 PM, hot enough said:

Impact says:

The US government says that 10 hijackers flew 2 planes into the WTC twin towers, is that a wild, cockamamie bunko conspiracy theory?

The US government says that those 2 planes caused massive damage and started large fires, is that a wild, cockamamie bunko conspiracy theory?

The US government says those hijackers were supported by Osama bin Laden, is that a wild, cockamamie bunko conspiracy theory?

Discuss. With proof.

Those buildings could never be brought down from some plane flying into the top of the towers. It's impossible. How would that weaken the structure at the bottom of the towers made of solid steel? Impossible. 

There were fireman on the ground who stated that they heard what sounded like explosives going off in the basement. Are we to call those fireman liars who should know the sounds of explosives going off? 

The zionist owner Silverstein bought the towers for a billion dollars even knowing that they had to rip out the asbestos on all the floors of the building at a tremendous cost. After they were brought down he collected 4 billion from an insurance policy that he had just took out 6 months earlier before the buildings came tumbling down. Unh? Good timing, eh? LOL.

The W7 building was brought down by explosives blocks away. It was reported that Silverstein told the a fire chief to pull it or in other words bring it down. Why? 

AE911 website tells it all, and what really happened to the Twin Towers. 

How can Bi Laden living in backwards Afghanistan in a cave be able to coordinate such a thing as what took place that day? How was he able to get his so-called hijackers all supposedly trained to be able to fly big passenger aircraft? It is all bull crap. 

But I guess that there are people that no matter how much proof shown them that this was a planned event, and explain it to them in simple terms, they still will never get it or agree with it. They believe the media and what that controlled corporate bankster media tells them without question. 

 

 

[taxme]

17 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I don't think they took off.  I think they relied on the actual pilots for that.

 

So, why then did these hijackers even bother taking lessons if there were no plans for them to fly those planes into the buildings, as the story that was told to us all? 

[Wilber]

3 minutes ago, taxme said:

So, why then did these hijackers even bother taking lessons if there were no plans for them to fly those planes into the buildings, as the story that was told to us all? 

What are you talking about?

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, taxme said:

So, why then did these hijackers even bother taking lessons if there were no plans for them to fly those planes into the buildings, as the story that was told to us all? 

There were no plans for them to take off.  There were plans for them to fly the planes into buildings, which required that they know their joystcks from their altimeters, hence the lessons.

[Wilber]

48 minutes ago, taxme said:

The lie is that they took lessons flying small aircraft, not big commercial airliners.There was no way they were able to just go to some airport, and start to learn how to fly one of those big birds and takeoff up and down on the airport runways. So, the lie is now your proof that this was a planned conspiracy. Believe it or not.   

Some of them did take lessons and also rented some 767 simulator time. All they were interested in is handling the aircraft in flight, not taking off and landing. Probably spent most of the time learning the basics of the autopilot and flight management system. Everything they did could have been done on the autopilot with some research and a little training. They hijacked the aircraft after they were in flight. The flying schools and simulator they used are a matter of public record. 

Edited March 8, 2017 by Wilber