Jump to content

Your apoinion on 911  

57 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Stephen Jones explains that the collapse of the world trade centers on Sept 11, if due to the damage and fires and not controlled demoilition violates the second law of thermodynamics.

Stephen Jones 911

Jones is a professor of physics at Bringham Young university.

for na85 I will explain how and why the second law applies but I am still working on that.

(Hi Kuzadd, have you read through some of the thread ?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephen Jones explains that the collapse of the world trade centers on Sept 11, if due to the damage and fires and not controlled demoilition violates the second law of thermodynamics.

Stephen Jones 911

Jones is a professor of physics at Bringham Young university.

for na85 I will explain how and why the second law applies but I am still working on that.

(Hi Kuzadd, have you read through some of the thread ?)

In the article you linked, the author frequently refers to the symmetrical collapse of the buildings. Images I've seen of the twin towers collapsing don't look very symmetrical to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kimmy Sunsettommy:I think you are simply a paranoid conspiracist.

I think you are the number one contender for the golden hockey puck award.

Pick one point from Popular Mechanics or 911Myths. I have dealt with your speculative web sites as far as I am going to. I will not argue with speculation that may be on these gate keeper publications. It has to be fact.

Dragging me into an arguement in speculation shows that you are not interested in truth, you are interested in winning an arguement and will use any means possible.

LOL,

I already picked a point concerning THERMATE analysis.

You keep ducking the rebuttal part against it.

It is really that simple.

The rest what you say is just bla bla bla.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have utterly failed to convince me that Dr Jones OR the section of the website are either right or wrong.

I'm not here to argue for Jones. His analysis is not yet proof so its not fact. I don't care if Jones is right or wrong - there are competing theories. I will only discuss fact I have explained that I will not engage in speculation because it doesn't win arguements.

Thank you for admitting that you have no rebuttal against the website over the dust analysis.

LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sunsettommy: just see another example of your unwillingness to make a full rebuttal.

You seem to confuse speculation with fact. If any debunker site speculates anything you are going to take it as fact.

I never took it as fact.

I was testing YOU to see how you handle differing opinions on that website over dust analysis.

You flunked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how to say this any clearer, but this is a pointless debate. If you bring forward anything which show's PN is wrong, all he has to say is that the CIA or Banks were behind it.

Once again, everyone just go to PN's profile, and hit the ignore button.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how to say this any clearer, but this is a pointless debate. If you bring forward anything which show's PN is wrong, all he has to say is that the CIA or Banks were behind it.

Once again, everyone just go to PN's profile, and hit the ignore button.

Sure it is pointless debate.All of it from him.

He he he....

You can use the ignore button too.

(smiling)

I will just watch this dude trip all over this subject.

I have seen excellent rebuttals on two other forums against that Killtown that would make this guy run away in tears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stephen Jones explains that the collapse of the world trade centers on Sept 11, if due to the damage and fires and not controlled demoilition violates the second law of thermodynamics.

Stephen Jones 911

Jones is a professor of physics at Bringham Young university.

for na85 I will explain how and why the second law applies but I am still working on that.

(Hi Kuzadd, have you read through some of the thread ?)

Not at all , it's quite a huge thread to read.

I will scan it though, it does look, like alot

looking through the last few pages, I don't see much discussion, on the topic at hand.

I do note an abundance of ridicule tactics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I notice today officials in the Bush admin are backing away from the claims made by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, today it is being claimed he exaggerated.

Yesterday, it was a wow, today , it is possible exaggeration.

it leads one to think that the "confession" is too full of holes to be deemed credible.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070315/ap_on_...rrorist_plots_4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sunsettommy:I have seen excellent rebuttals on two other forums against that Killtown that would make this guy run away in tears.

Lets hear them !!! I want you to make me run away in tears. Please don't hold back.

Use them here instead of having me look for them that way you can humiliate me in front of everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sunsettommy:Thank you for admitting that you have no rebuttal against the website over the dust analysis.

The web site on dust analysis is completely irrelevant to the specific evidence of sulfidization reported by FEMA and also by Jones. Just saying anything and everything can be found in the dust does not explain the sulfidization of beams. If we were claiming sulfidization of the dust you may have a point but we are not.

If there was a simple explanation for the sulfidization of the beams then FEMA would have given it. The sulfidization is direct evidence of high explosives that use sulfur as an accelerant. It can't be explained any other way - which is why FEMA offers no explanation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I told you I would show that Popular Mechanics and 911Myths is lying or creating straw men or using bad science in every single one of their points. You keep bringing up the Thermate analysis on 911 Myths so I will deal with that one. I thought you could pick something better.

Thermate 911Myths

Jones states that he has found evidence of thermate. 911Myths who has no physics expertise tries to say that this is unlikely and tried to discredit Jones conclusions based on some unlikely scenarios such as samples being confused. They don't prove Jones is wrong. I haven't seen any proof that Jones is right - all he does is say he has found evidence of thermate.

The FEMA report itself shows pictures of sulfidization on one of the wtc beams - there is a picture in the FEMA report. 911Myths in no way addresses this.

How is it that FEMA cannot explain the sulfidization during an investigation and having access to actual evidence and 911Myths can explain it ?

911Myths just tries to explain it away using unlikely scenarios.

So that is thje point you brought up and I have dealt with it as far as I am concerned.

My final remark is that Stephen Jones (and Kevin Ryan) have both lost their jobs over exposing what they believe as truth in 911 that is being covered up or ignored by the experts. They had everything to lose and nothing to gain so I doubt they would do this for any other reason than that they think 911 was an inside job and needs to be exposed. This explains why more people haven't come forward and said they believe 911 was an inside job.

One question: who is the "we" that they keep refering to on this site. Has anyone associated their name with this "groundbreaking work" ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BC:Nope....Mr. Jones is no longer at BYU, after paid leave and forced retirement effective Jan. 1, 2007. Now he will have more time to resume that Cold Fusion hoax from the '80s.

Right, the University kept him after his work on cold fusion - I'm not sure what involvement he had but I know that exploratory science is usually going to be wrong. As a programmer I spend more than half my time trying to find my mistakes. Its the nature of discovery. Cold fusion was taken seriously back in the 80's

and Jones didn't lose his job over his work in that.

They didn't have a problem with this professor until he started talking about 911. Same with Ryan. I think this shows why you do not see a lot more experts saying they think 911 was an inside job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG, thermite destroyed the Hindenberg as well!

Since the Hindenberg was designed to not explode, and since there have been no hydrogen blimp disasters of that scale before or after the Hindenberg, it's obvious that it wasn't an accident.

It was clearly a cover-up designed to kill witnesses and destroy documents about the American banking oligarchy's involvement with Nazi Germany.

-k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I notice today officials in the Bush admin are backing away from the claims made by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, today it is being claimed he exaggerated.

Yesterday, it was a wow, today , it is possible exaggeration.

it leads one to think that the "confession" is too full of holes to be deemed credible.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070315/ap_on_...rrorist_plots_4

I have noticed this kind of thing often in the news. Report says A today, tomorow it will be corrected with , well actualy the report should be B. It happens a lot. It's not hard to see. So officials should say nothing untill they investigate more. The news is tricksy sometimes. So pay attention. Plenty of inconsistencies even between news organizatiions that rely on others like AP for their information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

kimmy:Since the Hindenberg was designed to not explode, and since there have been no hydrogen blimp disasters of that scale before or after the Hindenberg, it's obvious that it wasn't an accident.

It was clearly a cover-up designed to kill witnesses and destroy documents about the American banking oligarchy's involvement with Nazi Germany.

Does this mean you give up ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not a thread about the Titanic.

Its a thread about 911 and a sociolical experiment too - for anyone who can interpret the data.

One can learn alot about people and their thought processes by reading the thread. "Truthies" post and discuss evidence relating to the issue. The non truthies just try to clogg it up with garbage because they cannot argue the issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"One can learn alot about people and their thought processes by reading the thread. "Truthies" post and discuss evidence relating to the issue. The non truthies just try to clogg it up with garbage because they cannot argue the issues."]

Hello-the fact that you perceive things in a certain way doesn't make that the gospel. As for your recommendations, may I politely state you read subjective opinion comments from people who simply tell you what you want to hear.

Venture outside your Larouchian thought spores and embrace other patterns fo cognition. Start with Alice In Wonderland. Why? Because the theories you propose have already been stated in that work and if you are going to quote them, go back to the source and quote them properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do all realize that the only reason these conspiracy theories exist is because people can't emotionally cope with such a tragic event, and feel the need to explain it in some other way that makes sense only to them.

Osama Bin Laden is a known terrorist, and has hated the United States for a long time. So what ends up happening is 19 Arabs, some of whom steal other peoples identities in order to operate in the USA, learn how to fly. Once inside they use box cutters and other tools to take over a plane, they also know that no one will interfere since the passengers believe that they will make it out alive. The planes hit the intended targets, and tragedy come about because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,723
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    DACHSHUND
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Ronaldo_ earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • babetteteets went up a rank
      Rookie
    • paradox34 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • paradox34 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • phoenyx75 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...