The 9/11 Conspiracy - Page 10 - Fandom Forums
Fandom Forums



Go Back   Fandom Forums > Indepth Interests > Debates Section > Conspiracy Theories

Conspiracy Theories Talk about your theories here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-22-2009, 05:03 AM   #136
Gansta_Ninja
Genin
 
Gansta_Ninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 53
Thanks: 2
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Gansta_Ninja is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miburo View Post
I did produce facts. Like the fact that your argument sucks since the premise doesn't support the conclusion. Like Mal said, you never showed that it would be impossible for a building to collapse without having all the steel in the building melt. If you think about it, it's actually a ridiculously stupid thing to even suggest.

First of all let’s see what a collapse building looks like:




Now, let’s see what a controlled demolition looks like:


Lastly, see what happened to the WTC:


__________________
Gansta_Ninja is offline   Reply With Quote


Old 10-22-2009, 05:04 AM   #137
Gansta_Ninja
Genin
 
Gansta_Ninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 53
Thanks: 2
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Gansta_Ninja is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miburo View Post
Like I said earlier, it doesn't matter since steel melting =/= structural failure. I think that perhaps the differences in building size and structure might have been a factor. And the fact that the Windsor Building wasn't hit by MASSIVE FUCKING PLANES could have played a role as well.
So what caused the Structural failure then? Are you suggesting that impact from the plane crash pulverized the entire steel structure from top to bottom?

I’m not the one making false assumptions and conclusions here. All my arguments are based to the report submitted by FEMA. It was there statement, where pointed out that it was the fire that caused the collapse. But I don’t buy their inconclusive story, for me it was just a cover-up story.

The steel that was used in the construction of the WTC were UL certified to withstand fire.
__________________
Gansta_Ninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 05:05 AM   #138
Gansta_Ninja
Genin
 
Gansta_Ninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 53
Thanks: 2
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Gansta_Ninja is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Even if there was a collapsed, like the one suggested by Mal. Still it would be impossible to totally pulverize the entire steel core. PBS made a documentary of WTC collapse, but failed to justify the collapse of the almost indestructible steel core.







See how massive the steel core was:



Pulverize in just a matter of minutes..

__________________
Gansta_Ninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 05:07 AM   #139
Gansta_Ninja
Genin
 
Gansta_Ninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 53
Thanks: 2
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Gansta_Ninja is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miburo View Post
Seriously? Wow.
Like Mal suggested, it's probably because the damage they suffered wasn't identical. Therefore the conditions weren't identical. Etc. Or it could be proof of a MASSIVE CONSPIRACY LOLOLOLOL...if you topped your pizza with paint chips when you were a kid, of course.
What happened at the WTC is not a laughing matter. This is the reason why I’m sharing this information. Only those who fear for the worst and ignorant of scientific principles can easily be manipulated. I suggest all of you to please study that data I presented and make further research of what really happened that day.

Okay, see the time frame:


So, what made the South Tower collapse first? Are you suggesting that the South Tower has more Papers, Tables and Carpets to burn?

I will present more evidence that the WTC is a well stage demolition. WHY? Who are the culprits? I will reveal next time. As of now I will end my statement with this question.

Why did the WTC 7 also collapsed?
__________________

Last edited by Gansta_Ninja; 10-22-2009 at 05:16 AM.
Gansta_Ninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 05:22 AM   #140
mewmew
Fodder-nin
 
mewmew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Manila
Posts: 426
Thanks: 154
Thanked 196 Times in 118 Posts
mewmew is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

once again, selective and inconclusive.
__________________
mewmew is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mewmew For This Useful Post:
Mal (10-22-2009), Miburo (10-22-2009)
Old 10-22-2009, 05:37 AM   #141
zer0systm
Antagonist
 
zer0systm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: West. Australia
Age: 25
Posts: 1,012
Thanks: 4,275
Thanked 8,057 Times in 2,875 Posts
zer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nice
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Jet Fuel is EXTREMELY flamable, it is said that the hottest flame is a flame that with no colour, this flame is usually associated with jet fuel / nitrogen and other fuels of a similar nature.

You hit a steel plate with a sledge hammer it will dent and buckle, you probably know all this but let me refresh you on it.

all objects have a "memory" this memory varies in different materials, for example, if you grab a strip of rubber and bend it over, it will fling back to its original position (or near on) unassisted, if you grab a length of steel and bend it over the same as the rubber it will stay in the position you bended it to and therefore it's original memory is lost...



now putting both my examples from above into the realistic scenario of the towers:

The plane represents the "hammer" and the tower represents the "steel", the velocity the "hammer" is traveling at is enough to push the "steel" beyond it's original memory, and pushing it to the point of break, quite simply the size of the plane and the width and thickness of the support beams also play a factor in the towers demise.

Like I said if you hit a steel plate with a sledge hammer it will dent, but if you where to scale the plane and support beam down to that of the a sledge hammer and steel it would be easy to identify the plane as the "sledge hammer" once again and the tower as a length of 6mm rod, From personal experience I know that you can snap 6mm rod with strikes from a hammer, you may argue it takes several strike to break that rod but again we are talking about a plane traveling at the speed it was which would clearly generate force 100x + that of a person swinging a hammer. making easy work of a 14" thick beam.

<33333333333 Mal
__________________
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.

Last edited by zer0systm; 10-22-2009 at 05:41 AM.
zer0systm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2009, 11:38 AM   #142
Miburo
Deos Fortioribus Adesse
 
Miburo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Valhalla
Posts: 3,546
Thanks: 34,399
Thanked 17,679 Times in 5,440 Posts
Miburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
Well played. I'm convinced. Nothing proves your stance like three totally different looking pictures of completely different buildings, after all. Very compelling. Good job.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
So what caused the Structural failure then? Are you suggesting that impact from the plane crash pulverized the entire steel structure from top to bottom?
I haven't claimed anything in this 'debate.' Because I think this whole thing is beyond retarded, even compared to the normal shit found in the conspiracy section. I'm counter-arguing your claims and that's all. I don't need to show anything about what happened. I just need to show that what you're saying is stupid. That's it.
Quote:
I’m not the one making false assumptions and conclusions here.
Ha.
Quote:
All my arguments are based to the report submitted by FEMA. It was there statement, where pointed out that it was the fire that caused the collapse. But I don’t buy their inconclusive story, for me it was just a cover-up story.
Wut. So wait. You're saying your argument is based on a report...that you're claiming to be fallacious. Okay.

Furthermore, you're claiming the report is faulty based on...pictures of a fire and the idea that for a building to collapse the steel has to melt. So...buildings only collapse from fires after all the steel has turned into molten puddles and shit, right? Wut. Couldn't it make sense that the fires just needed to be hot enough to expand steel, causing it to bend and sag?
Quote:
The steel that was used in the construction of the WTC were UL certified to withstand fire.
[IG]http://img8.imagesack.us/img8/2748/vlcsnap75591.png[/IG]
That wouldn't mean they're fireproof, or that the buildings were indestructible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
Even if there was a collapsed, like the one suggested by Mal. Still it would be impossible to totally pulverize the entire steel core. PBS made a documentary of WTC collapse, but failed to justify the collapse of the almost indestructible steel core.

[IG]http://img39.imagesack.us/img39/8194/vlcsnap55729.png[/IG]

[IG]http://img21.imagesack.us/img21/8727/vlcsnap56045.png[/IM]



See how massive the steel core was:

[RL=ttp://img188.imagesack.us/i/vlcsnap51452.png/][/URL]

Pulverize in just a matter of minutes..

[UL=http://img94.imagesack.us/i/vlcsnap56480.png/][/RL]
So what's your argument here? OMG LYKE SEE HOW MASSIVE THAT SHIT IS? FUCKING IMPOSSIBLE LOLOL

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
What happened at the WTC is not a laughing matter. This is the reason why I’m sharing this information. Only those who fear for the worst and ignorant of scientific principles can easily be manipulated. I suggest all of you to please study that data I presented and make further research of what really happened that day.
I was laughing at you.

Quote:
Okay, see the time frame:
[IG]http://img18.imagesack.us/img18/5677/vlcsnap61297.png[/IG]

So, what made the South Tower collapse first? Are you suggesting that the South Tower has more Papers, Tables and Carpets to burn?
Like what has been stated a couple of times now by a couple of different people, it is entirely possible and makes a lot more sense to think that the two buildings received damage in different ways. So the first one to collapse suffered damage that would make it collapse first, despite being the second building hit. It's really, seriously, not a hard concept to grasp.

Example: I go to a wrestling tournament. Let's say there are two mats, mat 1 and mat 2. Mat 1 starts a match, and I start a match on mat 2 a minute later. I pin my guy. My match is over before the match on mat 1, despite mat 1 match starting before mine. OMG CONSPIRACY? No. Just different circumstances resulted in different results. Common fucking sense. Same exact thing here.
Miburo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Miburo For This Useful Post:
Mal (10-22-2009), mewmew (10-24-2009)
Old 10-22-2009, 05:13 PM   #143
Mal
Scotch
 
Mal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,090
Thanks: 12,725
Thanked 10,818 Times in 3,844 Posts
Mal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of light
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Miburo has, as usual, adeptly covered most of your points so I'll keep this short(ish):

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
The steel that was used in the construction of the WTC were UL certified to withstand fire.
"Smoking" fires couldn't have reached those temperatures? Sure, why not? It doesn't really matter, though. You know why? Because you're dumb.

Seriously though, you are. I'm not even going to prove your dumb until you have a chance to actually prove your claim that "Buildings filled with carpet, paper, cloth and countless other materials can burn and produce no smoke."

Think about it. It's pretty stupid.


Going back to Simon Who Does Not Have CP's earlier argument (just to beat it more to death): "There were no planes."
I just now realized the staggering stupidity of that claim, beyond "phony" eye witness accounts. Question: Why not actually have planes hit the towers?

War with Iraq was estimated at $60 billion in 2003. A Boeing 757-200 series airliner runs about $65 million. Surely 0.001% is a worthwhile investment to make your "conspiracy" as believable as possible.
Mal is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mal For This Useful Post:
Miburo (10-22-2009)
Old 10-24-2009, 04:05 AM   #144
Gansta_Ninja
Genin
 
Gansta_Ninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 53
Thanks: 2
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Gansta_Ninja is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
Originally Posted by mewmew View Post
once again, selective and inconclusive.
And you’ll convince the world that there was no conspiracy with this single liner statement. Counter facts with facts, this is a debate and not just your typical fave anime chit-chat. Go play somewhere else boy!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miburo View Post
I haven't claimed anything in this 'debate.' Because I think this whole thing is beyond retarded, even compared to the normal shit found in the conspiracy section. I'm counter-arguing your claims and that's all. I don't need to show anything about what happened. I just need to show that what you're saying is stupid. That's it.
You haven’t claimed anything? Don’t play stupid Mibs, you just claimed that there was no 911 CONSPIRACY. If you are counter-arguing my statements, you have already made a stand; making you on the Negative Side. You don’t need to show anything about what happened? You just can’t prove that I’m wrong. I presented multiple facts, applying the laws of physic to the collapse of WTC. I believe you are / were a debater like me, and you know to well that you must present exhibits of photos and experts opinions/ studies to prove your point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miburo View Post
Wut. So wait. You're saying your argument is based on a report...that you're claiming to be fallacious. Okay.
Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) produced this report. An official report submitted to the President of the United States of America. If you’re saying that this so-called report is “Fallacious”, therefore we are on the same side then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miburo View Post
Furthermore, you're claiming the report is faulty based on...pictures of a fire and the idea that for a building to collapse the steel has to melt. So...buildings only collapse from fires after all the steel has turned into molten puddles and shit, right? Wut. Couldn't it make sense that the fires just needed to be hot enough to expand steel, causing it to bend and sag?
That wouldn't mean they're fireproof, or that the buildings were indestructible.
What happened to the steel core didn’t just bend or sag, but melted. The planes crashed on the higher floor, but why were the base steel core melted?

FYI, the steel beams and trusses were fire proofed with the CANCER CAUSING ASBESTOS!!


Were the open fires of WTC strong enough liquefy steel?




I suspect that THERMITE was used to weaken the entire steel support. Thermite is an incendiary use by the Military.



A compound of Iron and Aluminum, and when ignited it will generate an extreme heat of 4500 degrees Celsius in just a matter of seconds.



One end product of Thermite is molten metal.
__________________
Gansta_Ninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2009, 04:08 AM   #145
Gansta_Ninja
Genin
 
Gansta_Ninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 53
Thanks: 2
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Gansta_Ninja is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mal View Post
Surely 0.001% is a worthwhile investment to make your "conspiracy" as believable as possible.
Speaking of investments………..

First, let me introduce to this man.. Mr. Larry Silverstein:



See how he fought to double the insurance policy..



Lucky devil!



Just weeks after the 911 attack, he made the preparations to rebuild. GOD BLESS AMERICA!




Still none of you can answer me why the WTC Building 7 collapsed. In fact the building 7 was never struck by plane. The truth may shock you!
__________________
Gansta_Ninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2009, 04:26 AM   #146
zer0systm
Antagonist
 
zer0systm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: West. Australia
Age: 25
Posts: 1,012
Thanks: 4,275
Thanked 8,057 Times in 2,875 Posts
zer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nicezer0systm is just really nice
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
Still none of you can answer me why the WTC Building 7 collapsed. In fact the building 7 was never struck by plane. The truth may shock you!
As the North Tower collapsed on September 11, 2001, debris hit 7 World Trade Center, causing heavy damage to the south face of the building. The bottom portion of the building's south face was heavily damaged by debris, including damage to the southwest corner from the 8th to 18th floors, a large vertical gash on the center-bottom extending at least ten floors, and other damage as high as the 18th floor. The building was equipped with a sprinkler system, but had many single-point vulnerabilities for failure: the sprinkler system required manual initiation of the electrical fire pumps, rather than being a fully automatic system; the floor-level controls had a single connection to the sprinkler water riser; and the sprinkler system required some power for the fire pump to deliver water. Also, water pressure was low, with little or no water to feed sprinklers.

After the North Tower collapsed, some firefighters entered 7 World Trade Center to search the building. They attempted to extinguish small pockets of fire, but low water pressure hindered their efforts. A massive fire burned into the afternoon on the 11th and 12th floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building. During the afternoon, fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30. In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon. At approximately 2:00 p.m., firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10th and 13th floors, a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse. During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building. Around 3:30 pm FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro decided to halt rescue operations, surface removal, and searches along the surface of the debris near 7 World Trade Center and evacuate the area due to concerns for the safety of personnel. At 5:20 p.m. EDT on September 11, 2001, 7 World Trade Center collapsed. There were no casualties associated with the collapse.
__________________
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
zer0systm is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to zer0systm For This Useful Post:
Mal (10-24-2009), Miburo (10-24-2009)
Old 10-24-2009, 05:19 AM   #147
Gansta_Ninja
Genin
 
Gansta_Ninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 53
Thanks: 2
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Gansta_Ninja is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
Originally Posted by zer0systm View Post
As the North Tower collapsed on September 11, 2001, debris hit 7 World Trade Center, causing heavy damage to the south face of the building. The bottom portion of the building's south face was heavily damaged by debris, including damage to the southwest corner from the 8th to 18th floors, a large vertical gash on the center-bottom extending at least ten floors, and other damage as high as the 18th floor. The building was equipped with a sprinkler system, but had many single-point vulnerabilities for failure: the sprinkler system required manual initiation of the electrical fire pumps, rather than being a fully automatic system; the floor-level controls had a single connection to the sprinkler water riser; and the sprinkler system required some power for the fire pump to deliver water. Also, water pressure was low, with little or no water to feed sprinklers.

After the North Tower collapsed, some firefighters entered 7 World Trade Center to search the building. They attempted to extinguish small pockets of fire, but low water pressure hindered their efforts. A massive fire burned into the afternoon on the 11th and 12th floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building. During the afternoon, fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30. In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon. At approximately 2:00 p.m., firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10th and 13th floors, a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse. During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building. Around 3:30 pm FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro decided to halt rescue operations, surface removal, and searches along the surface of the debris near 7 World Trade Center and evacuate the area due to concerns for the safety of personnel. At 5:20 p.m. EDT on September 11, 2001, 7 World Trade Center collapsed. There were no casualties associated with the collapse.
First and foremost let my give you a bird’s eye view of the WTC 7:



Now, let me summarize your amazing story:

(1.) The WTC building 7 collapsed due to debris from WTC North Tower.

Since you didn’t produce any photo, let me provide you:



Compare this to what happened to WTC 3, WTC 4, WTC 5 and WTC 6.



The damage sustained by the buildings were infinitely far greater from WTC 7. But all the buildings withstood the crashing debris.

(2.) Fire fighters extinguished small pockets of fire.

Once again, please allow me to present the visual.



Yes there were some unidentified smoke… and some pockets of fire.



FYI, the WTC 7 is the first steel structure collapsed due to fire. AMAZING!!

On my next presentation, I will reveal why WTC Building 7 has to be removed. Its collapse baffled scientist and engineers all over the world.
__________________

Last edited by Gansta_Ninja; 10-24-2009 at 05:33 AM.
Gansta_Ninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2009, 05:48 AM   #148
mewmew
Fodder-nin
 
mewmew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Manila
Posts: 426
Thanks: 154
Thanked 196 Times in 118 Posts
mewmew is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
And you’ll convince the world that there was no conspiracy with this single liner statement. Counter facts with facts, this is a debate and not just your typical fave anime chit-chat. Go play somewhere else boy!
So where's the facts? you claim your refusal to believe in an official FEMA report to be fact, you must be joking.

Inconclusive pictures are not facts if not assessed by true experts in their field. Selective presentation of evidence is not fact, it is only a subjective angle in a story.

also NITC, with assistance from ASCE, SFPE, NFPA, AISC, CTBUH and SEAoNY along with other independent investigative firms, indidual experts in logistics/ explosives have thoroughly disproved the controlled explosives "theory" of the WTC buildings collapse. if you've read enough from your source, maybe you should try reading up on the studies of these institutions on the 9/11 collapse.

And please, stop treating your evidence as "legitimate" science which makes you look all the more stupid, as it clearly shows that your theory was presented at a reverse scientific method (hypothesis built around a conclusion).

EMRTC tested the thermite theory thoroughly by applying it on a smaller column than those found on the WTC. It didn't even melt the smaller column. Also, for the thermite to be efficient, the entire column, should be surrounded by thermite. that means parts of the columns exposed to the people should also be rigged with thermite, and parts that are outside the building of WTC 7 should be rigged too which means that if thermite was really in the WTC 7 and twin towers exterior, it would really look like a controlled fireworks display from a witnesses perspective, which as expected nobody saw such a thing.

according to Stuart Vyse, a professor of psychology, "How many hundreds of people would you need to acquire the explosives, plant them in the buildings, arrange for the airplanes to crash and, perhaps most implausibly of all, never breathe a single word of this conspiracy?" His clearly wants to point out in this statement which is an excerpt from a study of individuality, that the more people involved in a secret, the greater the probability it will be told. Which means a conspiracy plot involving hundreds of thousands of people, wherein none of those people will utter a word about the ploy, is impossible unless they possess hive mentality which is uninfluenced by the environment (or all these hundreds of thousands of people are being mind-controlled, which is rather a joke.)

This conspiracy theory is plain stupid because it discredits all who died and all the witnesses to the horror of the tragedy by presenting an alternate single-minded view of reality from a person aloof from the experience.
__________________
mewmew is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mewmew For This Useful Post:
Mal (10-24-2009), Miburo (10-24-2009)
Old 10-24-2009, 09:20 AM   #149
Mal
Scotch
 
Mal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,090
Thanks: 12,725
Thanked 10,818 Times in 3,844 Posts
Mal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of lightMal is a glorious beacon of light
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
And you’ll convince the world that there was no conspiracy with this single liner statement. Counter facts with facts, this is a debate and not just your typical fave anime chit-chat. Go play somewhere else boy!
LOLOLOLOLOL. He thinks he's people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
You haven’t claimed anything? Don’t play stupid Mibs, you just claimed that there was no 911 CONSPIRACY. If you are counter-arguing my statements, you have already made a stand; making you on the Negative Side. You don’t need to show anything about what happened? You just can’t prove that I’m wrong. I presented multiple facts, applying the laws of physic to the collapse of WTC. I believe you are / were a debater like me, and you know to well that you must present exhibits of photos and experts opinions/ studies to prove your point.
Disagreeing with you is not "claiming" anything except that you're wrong. We don't need to show anything about what happened. Why can you simpletons not understand this? You are the ones claiming the official report is wrong. So far as we're concerned, the official report has been proven right, so the burden of proving it wrong is on you.
And no, we're not "debaters like you". We're better. We actually understand logic, argument and the burden of proof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
What happened to the steel core didn’t just bend or sag, but melted. The planes crashed on the higher floor, but why were the base steel core melted?
You insist we provide "exhibits of photos and experts opinions/ studies to prove your point" then just flat out claim the cores melted? Where is your evidence?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
FYI, the steel beams and trusses were fire proofed with the CANCER CAUSING ASBESTOS!!
FYI, "CANCER CAUSING ASBESTOS" is fire proof, not plane proof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
Were the open fires of WTC strong enough liquefy steel?

Good work. You have proven that columns were cut during clean-up:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
blah blah blah THERMITE blah blah UNRELATED OR ARBITRARY PICTURES blah blah
Yeah, that was all dumb.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
Speaking of investments………..

First, let me introduce to this man.. Mr. Larry Silverstein:

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/1...csnap34680.png

See how he fought to double the insurance policy.

http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/4889/vlcsnap33042.png

Lucky devil!

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/7269/vlcsnap33467.png
What an unreasonable bastard! Damn him for expecting his insurance company to fulfill their contract!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
Just weeks after the 911 attack, he made the preparations to rebuild. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/922/vlcsnap36728.png
Would it have been better if he waited for a few more weeks? A month? A year? What difference would it have made? It's better that a new construction was planned as soon as possible to give people hope and comfort at that time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
Still none of you can answer me why the WTC Building 7 collapsed. In fact the building 7 was never struck by plane. The truth may shock you!
OH SHI-! He caught us again guys! He knows that the only possible way a building can collapse is if you hit it with a plane!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
First and foremost let my give you a bird’s eye view of the WTC 7:

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/7...csnap66821.png

Now, let me summarize your amazing story:

(1.) The WTC building 7 collapsed due to debris from WTC North Tower.

Since you didn’t produce any photo, let me provide you:

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/4...csnap67793.png
That sure is a massive cloud of debris engulfing WTC 7.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
Compare this to what happened to WTC 3, WTC 4, WTC 5 and WTC 6.

http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/6...csnap67981.png

The damage sustained by the buildings were infinitely far greater from WTC 7. But all the buildings withstood the crashing debris.
I'm really getting tired of you making the same dumb mistakes over and over again. Different buildings, different damage, different circumstances. Let's try another analogy:

There is a group of people standing around enjoying themselves at a party. All of a sudden OH SHIT A GRENADE!
The grenade explodes and the 4 people standing close to it are horribly maimed but survive. A fifth person standing 10 feet from the group is hit with a single piece of shrapnel which pierces their skull and kills them instantly.

Different people, different injuries, different circumstances. Get it yet?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
(2.) Fire fighters extinguished small pockets of fire.

Once again, please allow me to present the visual.

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/6659/vlcsnap67556.png

Yes there were some unidentified smoke… and some pockets of fire.

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/8...csnap67695.png

FYI, the WTC 7 is the first steel structure collapsed due to fire. AMAZING!!
Stop strawmanning it up. "small pockets of fire"? What about the "massive fire burn[ing] into the afternoon"? Zer0 clearly said it collapsed due to the combined damage of debris of WTC 1/2 and the massive fires throughout the building.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
On my next presentation, I will reveal why WTC Building 7 has to be removed. Its collapse baffled scientist and engineers all over the world.
Because anything that baffles people is completely impossible. Like gravity, right? No one can explain for certain what it is, so it has to be impossible.
Mal is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Mal For This Useful Post:
mewmew (10-24-2009), Miburo (10-24-2009), zer0systm (10-24-2009)
Old 10-24-2009, 10:18 AM   #150
Miburo
Deos Fortioribus Adesse
 
Miburo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Valhalla
Posts: 3,546
Thanks: 34,399
Thanked 17,679 Times in 5,440 Posts
Miburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond reputeMiburo has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The 9/11 Conspiracy

Oh, man. Well fucking done, Zero, Mew (from MANila. That's awesome.), and Mal. I'm rocking a massive hardon after seeing that thorough logical ass-beating you all just dished out. Only reason I'm posting is to compliment you heroes and to respond to the little bit directed at me even though Mal already covered it petty damn well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gansta_Ninja View Post
You haven’t claimed anything? Don’t play stupid Mibs, you just claimed that there was no 911 CONSPIRACY. If you are counter-arguing my statements, you have already made a stand; making you on the Negative Side. You don’t need to show anything about what happened? You just can’t prove that I’m wrong. I presented multiple facts, applying the laws of physic to the collapse of WTC. I believe you are / were a debater like me, and you know to well that you must present exhibits of photos and experts opinions/ studies to prove your point.
Actually, the only thing I've claimed is that you haven't proven your stance. Which is that there was some lolconspiracy. And I've supplied evidence of that in the form of pointing out the obvious flaws in your arguments. I'm just being a rational skeptic in regards to your claims. Which is the logical stance to take until you've supplied actual proof to support them. I wouldn't take the stance of "NO CONSPIRACY" because I actually know how logic works. There is no need to disprove the unproven. That'd be like setting out to untie a show that hasn't been laced. Simple, basic logic. Like Mal said, we aren't debaters like you. We actually know how to debate.

Also, I'd tell you to stop playing stupid. But I don't think you're playing.
Quote:
Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) produced this report. An official report submitted to the President of the United States of America. If you’re saying that this so-called report is “Fallacious”, therefore we are on the same side then.
I never said it was fallacious. You did. And you never supplied any proof to support that claim, FYILOLOLOL.
Quote:
What happened to the steel core didn’t just bend or sag, but melted. The planes crashed on the higher floor, but why were the base steel core melted?

Were the open fires of WTC strong enough liquefy steel?

[UL=http://img41.imagesack.us/i/vlcsnap48873.png/][IG]http://img41.imagesack.us/img41/7360/vlcsnap48873.png[/IG][/UL]
I lol'd unbelievably hard at you posting a picture of steel cut by cleanup crews.
Miburo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Miburo For This Useful Post:
Mal (10-24-2009), mewmew (10-24-2009), zer0systm (10-24-2009)
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.