Tweet
I entirely admit that it was wrong of me to speculate.
-
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier -
Raise your hand if you think there's any point to arguing about this with a 9/11 truther.<p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures
</p>Comment
-
I think it would be excellent if other people were to continue arguing with HalfLotus.
Apolyton's Grim Reaper 2008, 2010 & 2011
RIP lest we forget... SG (2) and LaFayette -- Civ2 Succession Games Brothers-in-ArmsComment
-
You are an evil evil man.<p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures </p>Comment
-
Three towers? I thought there were two, hence "the twin towers?" Or is that just what they want us to think? Was there a third tower on the grassy knoll?Originally posted by HalfLotus View Post
See also Tom Rogers's "Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics" book for its aside on why 9/11 truthers are '*****. Briefly, to address the main "points" typically employed:
1. Yes, steel melts at a much higher temperature than burning plane fuel can generate. However, steel softens long before it melts completely, and softened steel doesn't hold up worth a damn.
2. While each floor of the WTC buildings was constructed to hold much more weight than necessary before failing, that doesn't work so well when the weight in question comes crashing down all at once. I can hold a bowling ball in my hand, but if you drop it on my hand from ten feet up there's going to be a crunching noise and a lot of hurt.
3. The building is not going to fall sideways thirty-odd minutes after a side impact. From a complete structural failure, you'd actually expect it to fall straight down. It's a massive object and there's no significant force pushing it sideways at the time of collapse.
For further details, wait for KH to show up in a bad mood.Comment
-
WTC buildings 1, 2, and 7 collapsed. That's three.
Softened steel will still provide some resistance, preventing a free fall collapse.
With asymmetrical fires on a handful of floors, it is nigh impossible for the structure to experience total failure, have been symmetrical, and occur at free fall speed. It's never happened before in history, and there have been a good many steel structure fires.
Total failure is not out of the question, physically speaking, although it is incredibly unlikely, but the symmetrical and free fall fashion is very close to impossible.
I couldn't find out who Tom Rogers is, other than an author, but this is from some 5000+ architects and engineers at http://www.ae911truth.org/
WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibits all the characteristics of a classic controlled demolition with explosives: (and some non-standard characteristics)
1. Rapid onset of “collapse”
2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a full second prior to collapse
3. Symmetrical “collapse” – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall acceleration
4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed mostly in its own footprint
5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
6. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly-qualified witnesses
7. Chemical signature of Thermite (high tech incendiary) found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples by physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.
8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
9. Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional
10. Fore-knowledge of “collapse” by media, NYPD, FDNY
And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.
1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”.Comment
-
Comment
-
You're trippin' Darius.
I've made one thread about the Fed in my 8 years here at poly. You, on the other hand, trolled me in that thread, called me out by name in another thread title re: the Fed, and now you're all giggly about it in this one.
The only incessant thing I see is you chasing me around and shoveling your pitiful ad hominem.Comment
-
The biggest argument that Bush had no prior knowledge was the fact that WHAT moron would have have it happen while sitting and reading to school kids and not having a real response prepared to make him look like a real leader. And it would take considerable brains to coordinate everything with terrorists. Brains, Bush obviously was lacking in.
It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron OComment
-
Originally posted by HalfLotus View Post
No. Aside from foreign policy, the big bad Fed is virtually all you post about on the OTF. The search function is not your friend.
Originally posted by rah View PostThe biggest argument that Bush had no prior knowledge was the fact that WHAT moron would have have it happen while sitting and reading to school kids and not having a real response prepared to make him look like a real leader. And it would take considerable brains to coordinate everything with terrorists. Brains, Bush obviously was lacking in.
Well in fairness, I didn't see HalfLotus say anything about Bush in particular. It'd be easy enough for him to circumvent your entire argument by claiming that "they" duped Bush just like the rest of us and the combination of his idiocy and his desire to go after Al-Qaeda rendered him "their" unwitting pawn ever since. There would be no evidence to support this added layer of complexity of course, let alone evidence of who "they" are in the first place, but that doesn't stop certain people.Comment
-
He did mention Bush specifically.A few to fiddle at the FAA. Dick Cheney was running NORAD, maybe a few generals were in on it. Obviously Bush and most likely high ranking staffers.It's almost as if all his overconfident, absolutist assertions were spoonfed to him by a trusted website or subreddit. Sheeple
RIP Tony Bogey & Baron OComment
-
-
"Our Government destroyed the Twin Towers"...
"The Moon Landing Was Faked"...
"The CIA created Aids"...
You just have to laugh at how silly some people's beliefs are... Hell, just look at most major religions
Keep on Civin'
RIP rah, Tony Bogey & Baron OComment
-
I think Bush knew about it, but planning and coordination? I doubt it.
He got his story mixed up later when he said he watched the first plane hit the WTC before going into the classroom, even though no video of it was shown on TV until after the second plane hit while he was in the classroom.Comment
-
Like I said, I've made one thread. And looks like, what, maybe 2 posts per year average re: the Fed?Originally posted by Darius871 View Post No.
Funny thing, all your links to me turn up more of your petty name-calling. Did you have anything of value to add to this thread, or more of the same?
And where is this KH fellow? I understand he must walk slowly, what with Drake hanging from his sack, but surely he can zip around the interwebs in no time flat.Comment
Comment