Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Providing proof/evidence that supports the US 911 Conspiracy Theory


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, hot enough said:

Sentient adults do not avoid issues that sit squarely in front of their eyes

Do you mean like videos of planes flying into buildings? Or does yournewswire claim that was all holograms? I'll get the popcorn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Omni said:

Do you mean like videos of planes flying into buildings? 

A video taken of the twin towers wasn't a news source at all, it was some average Joes. See how frightened you are. 

Lawrence Livermore US government scientists are not a news source. See how frightened you are. 

RJLee Group is not a news source. See how frightened you are. 

FEMA is not a news source. See how frightened you are. 

The hijackers' passports story came from your own USGOCT news sources. See how frightened you are. 

The hijacker's bandana story came from your own USGOCT news sources. See how frightened you are. 

After you have addressed the above, you can provide evidence that the planes that the USGOCT says flew into the places they said actually happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, hot enough said:

It's your claim therefore it's up to you to prove it.

What claim? I offered an opinion. You're saying the vast VAST majority of scientist's and engineers actually do support the same theory you do? 

Who knew? I would have expected to be hearing about this in the news virtually everyday.

Edited by eyeball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What claim? I offered an opinion.

Why would you offer such an uninformed opinion, with CAPITALS!? And then demand proof. 

Are you not just being an agent provocateur; a real question? Because you are faced with so much nutty USGOCT nonsense and so much science that refutes it that you can't be anything but. 

Quote

 

You're saying the vast VAST majority of scientist's and engineers actually do support the same theory you do? 

Who knew? I would have expected to be hearing about this in the news virtually everyday.

 

Please, eyeball, you cannot be this dumb/naive/out of touch! If you don't know how much the media has done to bury this, there is no hope for you as a conscientious citizen in any dealings with any level of government. 

I never said what you said above. I said the vast majority of academics are silent, stone cold silent.

Nanothermite is NOT a theory. 

Nanothermite being found in WTC dust is NOT a theory.

The by-products of nanothermite reactions being found in WTC dust is NOT a theory.

A human being exploded out of a twin tower window is not a theory.

RJLee, a top forensic firm describing a unique WTC dust signature with molten and vaporized metals within, much of it from nanothermitic reactions is not a theory.

These are things [many more too] that are completely impossible under the USGOCT story, but given this and much more you just ignore the impossibles and cling to a fantasy, a fantasy that you YOURSELF say you don't believe. 

This is phantasmagorical!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, hot enough said:

A video taken of the twin towers wasn't a news source at all, it was some average Joes. See how frightened you are. 

Lawrence Livermore US government scientists are not a news source. See how frightened you are. 

RJLee Group is not a news source. See how frightened you are. 

FEMA is not a news source. See how frightened you are. 

The hijackers' passports story came from your own USGOCT news sources. See how frightened you are. 

The hijacker's bandana story came from your own USGOCT news sources. See how frightened you are. 

After you have addressed the above, you can provide evidence that the planes that the USGOCT says flew into the places they said actually happened. 

You're really losing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Omni said:

You're really losing it.

You're the guy who can't provide one iota, one speck, one piece of evidence to support your wacky USGOCT, Omni. 

Here's your questions again. Why are you such a scared little child?

A video taken of the twin towers wasn't a news source at all, it was some average Joes. See how frightened you are. 

Lawrence Livermore US government scientists are not a news source. See how frightened you are. 

RJLee Group is not a news source. See how frightened you are. 

FEMA is not a news source. See how frightened you are. 

The hijackers' passports story came from your own USGOCT news sources. See how frightened you are. 

The hijacker's bandana story came from your own USGOCT news sources. See how frightened you are. 

After you have addressed the above, you can provide evidence that the planes that the USGOCT says flew into the places they said actually happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hot enough said:

Why would you offer such an uninformed opinion, with CAPITALS!?  

To underscore the same point I've made a couple of times now about the extraordinary theory you've posited.

And then demand proof.

You claimed what I said was absolutely false. That sort of absolute statement requires evidence don't you think? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, eyeball said:

To underscore the same point I've made a couple of times now about the extraordinary theory you've posited.

Why are you always so nebulous? Are you afraid you are going to embarrass yourself. I have only pointed out absolute impossibilities in the USGOCT, ones that you are studiously avoiding addressing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, hot enough said:

Why are you always so nebulous? Are you afraid you are going to embarrass yourself. I have only pointed out absolute impossibilities in the USGOCT, ones that you are studiously avoiding addressing. 

Get another million or so scientist's and engineers to point them out as well and you'll have something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, eyeball said:

Get another million or so scientist's[sic] and engineers to point them out as well and you'll have something.

Uncontested science stands as the science of the day. 

I am continually amazed at your seeming deep delusion. What don't you grasp about the word "impossibilities"? And when all these impossibilities stare you in the face your brain seemingly ceases to function. 

Why do you keep saying "you/you'll". It isn't me that has done this science, I'm only reporting it. That is dishonest.

Listen starting at 4:35 where Dr Grissom, one of the top US physicists describes his reviewing of the Harrit et al paper on the discovery of nanothermite in WTC dust. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, eyeball said:

The burden of evidence is on you not me.

More dishonesty. You, eyeball, advanced the notion, a fiction, that there are myriad scientists who support the USGOCT, when there aren't. Just try to find some. Why can't you find scientists who have published peer reviewed papers against the Harrit et al paper? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, hot enough said:

Your "science" is as it has always been, Omni, nonexistent. 

Why can't any one of you USGO Conspiracy Theorists provide any evidence for the USGOCT?

Because we're not the conspiracy theorists. and that's just one video which refutes a lot of what you call "science".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Omni said:

Because we're not the conspiracy theorists. and that's just one video which refutes a lot of what you call "science".

Of course you are conspiracy theorists. Is English your first language? You believe in a wacky theory about a conspiracy that has no evidence to support it. 

I'm especially impressed, as I'm sure all your fellow conspiracy theorists are, by your in depth, brilliant scientific discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, hot enough said:

Of course you are conspiracy theorists. Is English your first language? You believe in a wacky theory about a conspiracy that has no evidence to support it. 

I'm especially impressed, as I'm sure all your fellow conspiracy theorists are, by your in depth, brilliant scientific discussion. 

From a guy who uses yournewswire as a source, that's hilarious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Omni said:

From a guy who uses yournewswire as a source, that's hilarious.

Terribly unscientific of you, Omni, but par for the course. You avoided the following.

Of course you are conspiracy theorists. Is English your first language? You believe in a wacky theory about a conspiracy that has no evidence to support it. 

I'm especially impressed, as I'm sure all your fellow conspiracy theorists are, by your in depth, brilliant scientific discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you're a big fan of the free fall conspiracy. Here's a little discussion on that. I think you will understand the difference between free fall and a pancake collapse as large chunks of the tower falls off and actually free falls.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...