Don;t hold back, soubs ... let it all out!

FWIW I agree wholeheartedly! BTW No 1 son looks the goods! I can recall when my No1 looked a bit like that, cheeky look, tousled hair. Now he's 30+ and living somewhere in the US (I believe).

There are obviously some very strong opinions and feelings going on in this thread, but lets please keep it on the friendly side of nasty everyone.

Thanks.

The last time I was in New Zealand was on a field trip in South Island. One vehicle was towing a trailer. The trailer had a puncture. 1 1/12 hours after it dropped off, we got back. There were 11 PHds and a bunch of others all fussing over finding the key to get the lock off the spare.

They all had the wrong analysis of the problem. The problem was not to undo the lock, it was to get the spare off the trailer. It took me all of 35 seconds and one whack with my geopick to release the spare and solve a problem which had beaten NZ and Oz's best minds for two hours.

Afterwards, a really fit Kiwi chick told me I was a useful person. That is one of the nicest compliments I've ever been paid. I should have stayed there with her rather than return to Perth to try to mend a broken marriage.

The world is full of clueless dickheads. This thread proves it.

7 pages! Mission accomplished!

the thing with this, as we can all guess by now, is that some people will always feel the need for alternate explanations or theories, maybe some of the info has been fudged but look at any major event around the world and there is ALWAYS a conspiracy theory.

Believe what you want - for me I take both lines with a huge pinch of salt from the local izakaya and mix it all together.

And how!
Too funny.

So what's next?

Man has been turning iron into steel, and welding it, for the past 3,000 years. Now we have invented the sociologist. Make that women and turn the clock back by 3,100 years.

Oyuki, Mr. Wiggles,

You seem like a reasonable fellows and not likely to blindly hold to a view in the face of reasonable evidence. After reading the back and forth on this topic where do you stand now?

Let me get back to you. After some of the posts, i took a vacation from this thread. The one link you posted about the building 7 evidence looked realy interesting and thourogh, so i want to read it fully before posting again.

Really, i am ambivolent. I haven't been convinced enough by either side to say conclusively what happened. I was playing devil's advocate for a while. Parts of both arguements make sense to me, and i have a lot more research to do.

Thanks for all the info tho. I really enjoyed your posts.

all this reading makes my eyes hurt.

the jury has been dismissed right?

Indeed. In fact the judge dismissed the entire case, saying that it was nothing more than a vexatious claim completely without merit and presented in a shambolic and inconsistent manner. Costs were awarded in favour of the defendant.

Ok sheeple here we go. It was fun to let it ferment while I did a bit more digging. Now soub, I studied your so called scientific analysis of the truss theory. Now you are basing it on some very weak premisses, namely not knowing how the WTC was constructed and using a simplistic and vague analogy of the structure based on a FEMA report.

I have read them and the nist report last night and conclude that their findings are so vague that it proves nothing. You all start with the idea that the first jet was fully fueled when on a Boston -LA flight. Well really out of the 24.000 gallon capacity according to CAR you will find that it will have no more than 10.000 gallons.

Furthermore FEMA does not specify on the grade of kerosene, again ask CAR about different grades and their flashpoints. Why do we use kerosene in aircraft> yes because it is not volatile and harder to ignite than other petrochemicals. So from the orange flames we can conclude scientifically that the fire was no where near hot enough to cause the steel to lose it strength over such a short period of time.

Maybe we can get a medium to contact Chief Oreo Palmer to ask him when on the 78th floor 7 minutes prior to the south tower collapsing, why he saw to isolated pockets of fire and thought he could put them out. Obviously if he was able to be there and thought he could extinguish the fires then your steel trusses were not losing shape bu actually cooling and gaining strength.

Further you all say that it was 1100F so the steel lost strength and it didn`t melt. Fine so can someone please explain calmly and scientifically how NASA pics of ground zero show temperatures of max750C in places and the reports of molten steel everywhere for weeks. How does that work? I just cannot understand. You are all so quick to throw out the molten steel. Actually let`s see fact 13 on the NIST site, how they found molten steel but thought it was irrelevant and didn`t bother to investigate it.

Oh but wait there was no core according to NIST and you all think it was a steel tube :-s, where does that come from? FEMA underestimates and generalises the core by saying that it was free standing. Hmmmmm no it wasn`t, boxed steel frames gradually becoming h beams. All made in Japan from high grade steel bolted together to form a very tough cage as the main support.

Anyway for all you Micheal Shermer disciples of antiscience and propaganda, please read.

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/sciam/index.html#meltedsteel

And

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/blueprints.html

including schematics and blueprints so you can actually see how the floors were constructed. Why were they supressed from release to the general public until last year? And the whole site is well organised with scientific facts about the structure and is well referenced.

So go read it and come back and shout some more personal insults because you can`t win your argument. Also before you label people conspiracists, please understand what that means. I know the word has been usurped to refer to revisionists but really as native speakers you should all know what they both mean.

I am so disturbed at the naivety displayed here and unwillingness to question anything that goes outside the realm of your supposed knowledge. Oh and Sociology was a little off the mark, I have an M.A in Philosophy and Politics and Ph.d in Philosophy(logic). So you can all laugh but unfortunately logic underpins all your legal, scienctific and engineering disciplines.

So let`s go reading and deprogramming our heads.

So NASA was in on it as well? I thought as much. Those SOBs, they weren't satisfied with faking the moon landings now they're getting in on 911 as well.

Well done Froggy, you've converted me!


If we say we believe, will you go away?

Now, if that ain't a waste of effort, then nothing is! Without offering an alternative, you are basically saying that the official answer is the best one, but you aren't convinced? Unless you can offer a reasoned alternative argument, It would be my sugestion that you should quit while you are behind.




I was once married to a shrink lady for whom that was the "killer argument". Whenever I asked for an explanation, I was told "If I have to explain, it isn't worth it." In my experience, if someone asks for an explanation, it is because the original statement was not adequately explained. If you are unwilling to explain, I (for one) will assume it is because you CANNOT! In that case, the argument will have reached its use by fate - no further input (or even reading of the thread) from me.

I think I know the real truth to what happened.

I really don't give.... anymore.

Lee Harvey Oswald was never killed by an angry mob. No, he was made the fall guy by the CIA for JFK's murder in 1963 and detained in a secret location all these years.

He bought his way out of captivity in 1997 from monies provided by the British secret service. In return for his freedom he organized the assassination of Princess Di and Dodie al Fayed because she was pregnant with Dodie's child.

He harbored a lot of resentment for the CIA for his framing of JFK's murder and subsequent incarceration. He wanted revenge.
Now, we all know that Osama bin Laden is really the head of the CIA, he was secretly promoted to leader during the Iran/Iraq war in the 80's. (now can you see where this is going?)
He organized the demolition of the WCT's and made it look like a terrorist attack and ultimately framed Osama for job.

Now if I could just prove he had something to do with that fake moon landing in 69......

BTW. I have a trade certificate in Air-conditioning.....does that count for anything?

Neither do I, but I just read 7 pages, so I feel I deserve to be a smart-arse.

I think it's going to rain. :(

I knew it!