Added: 2 years ago
From: garypopkin
Views: 5,102
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (460)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Truthers and debunkers can debate about things all day long. The same saying that's been around forever couldn't be more relevant here. "There's your side, there's my side and there's the truth". Either side claiming to have all the answers is delusional. To me clearly there is more than meets the eye about 9-11, what that is- we won't know for a long time. Debating about how the towers collapsed will get us nowhere closer to the truth. Truther vs Debunker = battle of the egos. Worthless.

  • Comment removed

  • CHRIST!

    You Truthers are just so friggin stupid.

    Tony must have gotten his degree from mail order.

    SHEEEESH!

    THIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII­IIIINK!

  • Debunkers are patheyic...G%

  • lol, did he say "my present guest accepted" or "excepted"?

  • This Szamboti character is a bumbling fool next to the NASA guy.

  • NASA, IplosionWorld, and NIST all know the deal....... but a 2000 A&E's still haven't seen the light! We're coming for ya we wont leave you behind in the science world, you STILL have a chance!

  • Strangely enough a so called "Theorist" does not just pull information (evidence) out of thin air. Or should we start to doubt our most famous "Theorists"? I want to laugh at those that call them that. On the other hand we have the "Naysayers". That is laughable. Rejecting all evidence provided. Let's look into this people..

  • The seat-back phones need a transmission technology. Its not magic transmission technology. What transmission technologies existed back 2001 and what transmission technologies existed on planes in general? back before 2001?

  • 13:46

    lol.

  • How can an interview host say in a disclaimer, 'I don't LIKE the people who propose these theories'? A disclaimer is a more or less legal custom. What has liking or disliking have to do with anything in a disclaimer in a purported intellectual debate? What, are we in a schoolyard?

  • Anyone see Pomaroo or Gravy around?

  • How can Mackey not see that "irreducible delusion" would more likely apply to OCTers than Truthers? The reason being that most people initially believed the Al-Qaeda narrative of 9/11. Turhters are just people that questioned this assumption. Debunkers are people that find reasons not to question it, and therein lies their Irreducible Delusion.

  • @niverent You obviously weren't listening to Ryan's definition of "Irreducble Delusion". He developed a theory based on the official report, that official report has mountains of evidence and no hard evidence which discredits that theory, so it stands up. Truthers develop a theory, when they are offered evidence which completely demolishes that theory they construct a new theory to work around that evidence so they can keep the root of that theory alive. Truthers are unwilling to let go.

  • @mikeyt34 Wrong and wrong. I am familiar with Ryan's idea of "Irreducible Delusion" and I think it perfectly describes debunkers. Or can you explain why there was molten steel at the WTC?

  • @niverent I can, there was no molten steel at WTC...that's a fallacy created by the truth movement and if had read the NIST report you would see they never claimed the steel was molten. Get your facts right.

  • @hornetgags There was molten steel there. Even Leslie Robertson, one of the lead structural engineers of the WTC saw it.

  • @niverent It wasn't steel, steel melts at 2750 degrees and the fires never got hot enough (they estimate the maximum was around 1800 degrees) the likelihood is it was mostly aluminium (from the plane fuselage) which melts at 850 degrees. But it definitely wasn't steel.

  • @hornetgags Well Leslie Robertson among others including NYPD firemen said they saw molten steel. The NYTimes reported there was molten steel. FEMA included a sample of molten steel from WTC7 and NASA images showed there were extremely hot temperatures. There was molten steel.

  • @niverent Sorry, that's just wrong. Leslie Robertson or NYPD are not qualified to state with any authority what metal it was. We know the fires didn't reach hot enough to melt steel, so it categorically cannot be molten steel. NIST have stated no steel was melted because of the temperatures. The molten metal was never tested but they know it wasn't steel. The fires never reached 2750 degrees so how could it be molten stee? Please use reason.

  • NASA imaging showed extraordinarily hot temperatures. Astaneh-Asl was a structural engineer that was allowed to examnie the steel - he also reported the temeratures was extremely hot. FEMA found steel with holes melted through steel (sample A36). NYTimes reported molten steel. RJ Lee group reported iron-rich microspeheres that were the result of molten steel. Sorry, you're a lightweight that doesn't know the facts. Go back to your Bon Jovi concert.

  • @niverent. The RJ Lee Group report considers samples taken several months after the collapses, and it is certain that torch-cutting of steel beams as part of the cleanup process contributed some, if not all, of the spherules seen in these samples.

    Go back to school sonny. When you grow up then I'll let you talk cupcake.

  • @niverent rom the NIST progress report in 2004: "The composition of the flowing material can only be the subject of speculation, but its behavior is consistent with it being molten aluminum"

    Of course you would know better wouldn't you cupcake? Seems a lightweight can debunk you easily and it's clear you didn't read the RJ Lee Group report otherwise you would have spotted the marks were made during clean up. Oops.....I'll leave you to it sweetie, I'm off to watch Bon Jovi.

  • @hornetgags I did read the RJ Lee group report.  Where did they say the spheres came from clean up again? I think you are lying.

  • @niverent I'm not going to do your research for you, do it yourself.

  • There is no commment in the RJ Lee report in which they say they iron came from clean up. On the contrary they say many metals were "melted during the WTC event" including "iron (or steel). Figures 21 and 22 are of the molten iron. Nowhere do they state that this was the result of the clean up yet they do state that it melted during the WTC event. So, like I said, stop your lying.

  • The government couldn't cover up a blow job.

  • @soulinite Wow........you are a genius haha

  • ... ? ...

  • @Twoofer moronerIQ40,

    You and your Twoofer ilk are hideous weasels. You don't know any science. You're slanderous. Frankly, you have no redeeming qualities. Good job, idiot.

  • @Twooftard moronerIQ40,

    "proof of demolition"

    Hilarious, and of course incorrect. Only you cement headed Twoofers believe such garbage.

  • @kangtimelord do you realize how insecure you sound? Reading through your posts, it seems you dont possess the intellectual horsepower to compose a coherent thought. Meaningless ramblings and repeat of slogans. How would a doctor treat someone with such mental illness like yours?

  • @Twoofer moronerIQ40,

    "laws of physics are freely available"

    Then why don't you know them, fuckhead?

    "engage your brain"

    Please, I have a college degree in physics. You need to "get a brain". You roam the internet, see crap science like "Tesla free energy" and actually believe it.. You're a fucking idiot who doesn't know what you're talking about.

  • the core columns were untouched and intact - only 14 and 15% on each tower were hit according to NIST - therefore the core columns could never be crushed - an intact core column cannot crush itself - it just is- what is above it? nothing but sky - and the core columns should have remained like the spindle on a record player - yet the whole building fell at near free-fall - impossible without the resistance being removed watch?v=WqXsbfpKhbI

  • 9/11 inside job - fire cannot melt iron - check reality - read griffin's books and get a clue

  • Proof of the greatness of Ryan Mackey

    watch?v=ZT4BXIpdIdo

  • @psikeyhackr  no jolt = physics laws defied - simple - demolition is the only explanation for a building exploding into dust all over NY

  • Hopefully Rivera will do his research and find out how flawed Szamboti's so called "analyses" really is.

  • FOX NEWS FLASH

    Geraldo Rivera plugs Building What? & ae911truth on WTC 7 Investigation

    Oh Yeh! Tony's looking good on Fox...as cool as a cucumber,

    Geraldo says: ".It is an intrigueing topic and I'm certainly more open minded about than I was."

  • @Oneaudience,

    Right, too bad. Problem is Twoofers and their slander.

  • Lots of comments, mudslinging below, science no mudslinging above, too bad what comes from above doesn't transfer to below because just maybe we would all learn somethings in the process and come to an agreement.

  • @Twoofer SeigoonIQ7,

    Your pathetic attempts at insults are what's laughable, moron. Also, you're laughing yourself all the way to the bank? WTF? Unoriginal, and quite frankly horrid. Actually a more accurate statement is "laughing all the way to moral bankruptcy". BTW, prickhead, did you go to local Twoofer rally on Veteran's Day last week to spew your slanderous shit to the Vets?

  • How many of you moron Twoofers posting here actually practice any kind of real engineering? None? Not surprising. Then why do you idiots feel compelled to embarrass yourself with your inane phony "science" posts to support your slander? Just wondering why you fuckheads are the way you are.

  • @gaylord You’re a fool and this is the best you can do when you can’t win an argument. You suck. Don’t do anymore drugs. you’re “deliberately” frying an already comatose brain–~snickers~

  • Mackey is an embarrassment, he makes meaningless distinctions, like claiming vibration and sound aren't additional energy sinks, simply because those sinks are accounted for by one method of investigation. They are still energy sinks, dumbass. Mackey exposes his bias again and again, he refuses to acknowledge any evidence that falsifies spontaneous collapse ideas. He tries to hammer every square peg into a round hole to satisfy his initial assumption, which is apparently that fire destroyed them

  • Mackey and the moderator keep asking if the damage from the falling floors above could destroy a floor below it, they all keep overlooking the fact that the damage was not significant enough to cause the failure of the floors. The suggestion that it should suddenly fall as if nothing were still supporting it is absurd, I guess these dummies think the fire burned away the structural steel since the plane "knocked the fireproofing off". Steel already is fireproof. :|

  • Szamboti's main point is sound, the structure under the damage was built to take the load of the weight above it, there is no conceivable scenario where the observed physical damage from the plane impacts and the subsequent fires alone could have caused the total failure of the entire structure that we all witnessed. Anyone who doubts that needs to examine their fundamental assumptions in search of one huge fuckup.

  • This debate forum seems like a platform for fans of the amazing Randi. I discovered this series of debates and have been trying to get to the origin of them. Randi knows a lot of tricks, magicians are all deceivers at their core.

    I've been watching some of these debates on the now defunct Google Video, wishing there was some way I could leave a comment. Little did I know it was all on YouTube as well. Yay.

  • So sad to see how America is fucked up by these debunkers.

    Tony, nobody believes you.

    Not even my son on 12 sees what is going on.....

  • @krussedulls watch?v=NiHeCjZlkr8 - the laws of physics cannot be changed for one special day - but can be used to prove that you're being lied to

  • @krussedulls Your son is an idiot just like his father. Americans are shameless losers and youre living proof.

  • @krussedulls

    they have more technical knowledge than any twoofer

  • Its Tony Zamboti in a 2 vs 1 battle. First Tony rips Ronald a new one and then finishes off the failed NASA engineer and his failed presentation. Its interesting to note how little Ronald actually contributed to this discussion.

  • Mackey is talking about (Festinger's) cognitive dissonance theory. Which body of theorey (official, non official) shows signs of being bandaged up, which shows signs of having an "irreducible delusion"?

    The host is clearly biased in favour of the official version, so Tony is on a sticky wicket.

    He makes a good point about the jolt. But with a 90 something storey building, seen from considerable distance, it is a bit difficult to measure jolt.

  • @Twoofer wordgoober,

    Pilots for 9-11 Truth? God, I hope I don't fly on a plane with one of those quacks.

  • @kangtimelord an irreducible delusion? Fire cannot melt iron and vaporize lead and melt molydenum and make buildings free-fall or explode all over Manhattan - these are flagrant violations of reality - and the laws of physics - you idiots need to take your head out of your asses

  • @Twoofer moronerIQ40,

    You fucking weasel.

    "Fire cannot melt iron and vaporize lead and melt molydenum and make buildings free-fall or explode all over Manhattan"

    Nobody but you lying Twooftards are claiming such.

    "and the laws of physics"

    You don't know the laws of physics, moron. So WTF do you pontificate that you do? You're just a quack guitarist who wants attention, that's all.

  • @kangtimelord the vaporized lead is in the rj lee group report on the wtc dust - if you could read and were interested in informing yourself you would know this - and the melted molydenum is in the usgs report - a government agency - why are so wilfully ignorant fuckwit? the laws of physics are freely available - no deceleration at all means that all resistance has been removed - this is proof of demolition - buildings do not offer zero resistance - engage your brain - try and use it

  • Comment removed

  • pilots for 911 truth

  • My my, there is some shocking news about Ronald Wieck and the rocket scientist on the innertubes. No wonder they are laying low...G%

    key words for Google are... pilots for 911 truth ronald wieck caning

  • Open and free debate... haha.... hahahahahehaeha.... HAHAHAHA

  • ~Now on Youtube~

    Ronald Wiecks Skeptic Show starring Arthur Scheuerman EXPOSED

  • wordgoober not very bright. Needs a wit, and coffee.

  • Where's Pomaroo, Kang is extremely boaring...G......zzzzzzzzzzZZZ

  • wordgoober, hope you don't doze off like that behind the wheel.

  • I rest my case...G%........zzzzzzzzzzZZZ­ZZZ

  • George Pataki, on video, inadvertantly affirmed that there was no concrete rubble and that the concrete was pulverized leaving 3" of dust over lower Manhatten, "river to river".

    A simple yes or no answer will do...( :

  • I'll field this one, Twoofer wordgoober.

    Uh, did you ask a question?

  • @kangtimelord Your pathetic attempt at an intelligent dialog on this blog has not only embarrassed intelligent people, it has also managed to make us look as foolish as you for being caught in the same virtual community as you. People like you represent the idiocy and apathy of today. Stand proud loser.

  • @Twooftard SeiguIQ7,

    My "pathetic attempt"? You obviously don't even read your own crappy posts, idiot.

    "only embarrassed intelligent people" - Clearly you are not talking about yourself since it is apparent you're an inept moron. You're inane post proves it all:

    "Its Tony Zamboti in a 2 vs 1 battle. First Tony rips Ronald a new one and then finishes off the failed NASA engineer and his failed presentation. Its interesting to note how little Ronald actually contributed to this discussion."

  • @kangtimelord Your’e a paper tiger and a fool, and a weak one at that.You are scared and it’s sadly telling by tone of your entire tirade.Perhaps you should consider taking a course in logic as well. I certainly would recommend it.

  • @Twooftard Seigu007,

    Frankly, you can take your recommendation and shove it up your ass, Twoofer. And you just keep on accusing FDNY and NYPD just like you fucking weasel Twoofers do. Go to hell, sicko.

  • @kangtimelord You degenerate, repetitive nit. Repeating something 20 times over is spam. You lost a LONG time ago. Your pathetic attempt at an intelligent dialog on this blog has not only embarrassed intelligent people, it has also managed to make us look as foolish as you for being caught in the same virtual community as you. We can only weep, and pray that we stop at this resemblance to you, as to look like you too…well, it’s a fate worse than death.

  • @Twoofer Seigu007,

    "Repeating something 20 times over is spam."

    So why do you keep "spamming", prick? And how could I have intelligent dialog when there are no intelligent people in your fucking Twoofer Movement?

    "We can only weep"

    Funny, I thought your weasel Twoofer psychos get giddy when you slander.

  • @kangtimelord Fabulous--an ignorant fool invoking terms used in formal rhetoric. You know as much about logic as you know about engineering: NOTHING.

    None of my assumptions are wrong, as you know, because they are supported by real evidence.

    What real evidence do you have for your idiotic fantasies? Still nothing?

  • @Twooftard SeiguIQ7,

    I have an engineering degree, prickhead. What have you got except monumental stupidity?

    "terms used in formal rhetoric" come natural to me unlike you who googles probably everything and understands nothing. 

  • @kangtimelord I had to run to the toilet from laughing so hard at the sheer imbecility of that mess that you label a thought train and compulsive propensity to misspell the simplest of words. So much for that "degree".

  • @Twooftard SeiguIQ7,

    "I had to run to the toilet"

    I'm sure that happens to you frequently since your brains are made of shit. And as far as misspelling words, first WGAF, second, which freaking "simplest of words"?

    What engineering degree did you hold again? None? You fucking Twoofers claim to know everything about engineering, yet none of you actually have any training or education in such. Go home and play your shitty guitar or whatever the hell you think you do for a living.

  • @kangtimelord You have inherited (among other things) the same nervous twitch that the other government swallowing sycophants that park here have demonstrated so stop right there, you talking monkey…you shouldn’t be giving me anything less than the best ass kissing performance you are capable of. I’m laughing all the way to the bank. You’re simply crying because I’ve put you in a mental wheelchair for life.

  • wodgeezer@RonaldWieck

    There are videos showing the concrete floors bring dismantled in the basement levels of WTC 2.

    True or false? Explanation please...G:

  • I was always curious why if no WMDs then why did Iraq ban inspectors.

  • I'm all for freedom of speech, but I'd make an exception to slanderous buffoon SeigoonIQ7

  • Seigu007,

    Some of us have noticed that you haven't come close to refuting a word I've posted. You've been beaten to a pulp because you're an ignorant liar peddling nonsense.

    Stop running long enough to explain why no structural engineers anywhere in the world have found significant errors of science in the NIST reports.

  • @RonaldWieck

    Thats too bad I was rather looking forward to dribbling your severed head all over this blogYou have inherited (among other things) the same nervous twitch that the other government swallowing morons that park here have demonstrated so stop right there, you talking monkeyyou shouldnt be giving me anything less than the best ass kissing performance you are capable of.

  • @RonaldWieck

    Theres only 3 of you in the little yellow bus. Just another chattering howler monkey in a string of many.

    Say something important.

  • @RonaldWieck

    Hilarious! Ron Wieck has turned into a shit throwing loon of the highest order.... Go over to here at the JREF forum in the Politics Forum. (link) Symposium on Iraqi WMD. The funny thing, is you see him using all the normal debunker tactics on some of the debunkers, but it's not working.

    Too give you a quick rundown. Even though there is no evidence to support his claims. Ron thinks that Saddam had WMD and that he disarmed it and gave it too Syria! A wild imagination.

  • EVERY intelligence service monitoring Iraq (Germany, Russia, France, China, Spain, Italy, Jordan, Turkey, etc.) agreed with American and British intel. NO intelligence service of any nation disagreed. Following the invasion, a few of Saddam's generals and several Eastern European intelligence officers stated that the Russians helped Saddam remove prohibited weapons to Syria. Both the Kay and Duelfer reports acknowledged the possibility, but could not confirm it.

    You've been caught lying again.

  • @RonaldWieck

    (The irony here...lol) The American Thinker.

  • @ kilirm

    Cheers ....G:

  • @Seigu007

    In your case; confused is an understatement.

    This is about preparing for an open and independent investigation where all of this evidence will be presented and questions of this nature will be asked.

    Yes, the concrete floors were intact in the basement floors of WTC 2. There are videos that show them being dismantled.

    At this point, I can't help but think you are just a shill. Keep in mind that Pomaroo uses the old "i am confused" thing whenever he is in cornered... ( :

  • Rofl!!!!!! This silly "mediator" was no one else than pomeroo from JREF!!! LOL now that explains a lot. These guys are nothing but pure bullshit. gravy, pomeroo, mackey, and the others they mentioned on this video, are nothing but laughable excuses for a critical thinker. Anyone who knows what kind of clowns spend their lives on JREF forums exercising rhetoric debunking is obviously going to dismiss anything that these clowns do set up.

  • Ron Wieck is shown here to know absolutely nothing. Even with help from failed engineer, Ryan Mackey. Disgraceful.

  • @Seigu007

    Ryan Mackey is a top aerospace engineer. He has failed at nothing anyone is aware of. You have been caught lying again.

  • @RonaldWieck

    Your crap might work over at JREF but youre only going to get eaten alive in here with your lying tongue and I dont speak tardese you pitiful talking monkey. Youre nothing but a two bit no talent parrot thats never beaten anyone thats even borderline respectable.

  • To know the truth of what happened on 911 it is necessary to consider all of the evidence. When you look at the melted conglomerate, observe the absence of concrete in the rubble, look at melted steel beams with holes in them, or witness tiny fragments of human bone on building tops; Do you strive for an irreducible conclusion? Do you wonder when you find that the concrete floors at ground level were still intact at WTC  2?

    Truth is a virtue my friends, to be found in a real investigation.

  • All nonsense. It's time to stop lying and learn something. There is no "absence of concrete" and no "melted" steel beams. How long can you peddle the same idiotic rubbish? Your lies have been exposed; your conspiracy is imaginary.

  • What a great understanding of the cause of the Truth movement. This "Irreducable Conclusion" really explains the cause of this increasingly expanding narrative myth of the Truth movement. I hope all Truthers can go back and reevaluate their irreducable conclusion, see what their original belief was, and see if they still believe it holds water. Do you still believe your reason for getting involved in the truth movement is still valid...And if not, why? Great thought experiment from Nasa guy

  • Twoofer wordgoofer poetry is awful

  • Truth is ....zzzzZZZZ

    The bag pipes around here are out of tune and no harmony can be heard. Truth, which is timeless and eternal, can emanate from every sour note found here to produce yet more harmony and beauty. The music of Bach or The Grateful Dead can be compromised for a while by disharmony of this nature, but will be heard with more clarity when the bag pipes of war are quieted...G:

  • @Twoofer twerpgeezer,

    "concrete evidence"? Hilarious, you should start with concrete wall you seem to slam your skull into, repeatedly.

  • Listen to the mockingbird, listen to the mockingbird........zzzzzzzZZZZ­ZZ

  • Fairy tales are of no interest for us folks who are looking for concrete evidence. No matter how you spin it there was an incredible amount of energy expended to produce the evident results of temperatures of 3000 degrees or more. Can you explain away the obvious evidence or will you continue to pretend that it doesn't exist...G: Tsk tsk tsk

  • Fairy tales are all you frauds have. The energy produced by the collapses has been calculated by several independent researchers (Frank Greening, Gregory Urich, Bazant himself). There is no evidence, "obvious" or otherwise, for your fantastic falsehoods. You cannot find a single demolition expert who takes your nonsense seriously.

  • The perpetrators used nano thermite disguised as insulation called Smacsonic and placed it in the elevators after their renovation. Smacsonic doesn't commence the nano thermite reaction until it attains a temperature of 1,600 degrees Fahrenheit. Then and only then does it reach its maximum temperature of 5,800 degrees Fahrenheit.

  • Sorry, wrong. No nanothermite was present anywhere in the WTC complex. The twin towers were struck, as you know, by fully-fueled commercial airliners. Thermite has no use in demolition. The collapses began, as everyone knows, from the impact floors. The elevators played no role. The inward bowing of the external columns, observable on all videos, cannot be accounted for by any known explosives or incendiaries.

    Boy, you are incredibly stupid.

  • Convieniently distorting the facts, and omitting relevant information makes you a model idiot. So kudos for helping me prove my point. The argument is over, because youve degenerated into pointlessness.

    Now be a good howler monkey and climb back into your tree. Moron.

  • There were no perpetrators using nanothermite. Only a brainless fool would even consider believing such a joke theory. Welcome to the Twoofer world, OperationMockinghimself. Send check for $1000 to Alex "Feed My Face" Jones for monthly membership fee.

  • 9/11 dress rehearsal -- Amalgam Virgo

    June 1-2 2001

    Blue team defenders -- CANR

    Red team attackers -- Global Guardians

    9/11 real deal -- Global Guardian,

    Vigilant Guardian

    September 10-12 2001

    Blue team defenders -- CANR

    Red team attackers -- Global Guardians

  • Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CJCSI 3610.01, dated July 31, 1997, required that all requests for assistance in hijackings be approved by the Secretary of Defense. An update to that order, CJCSI 3610.01, dated June 1, 2001, had an exception for emergencies that would seem to give commanders in the field autonomy in ordering intercepts. However, that exception did not cover requests for "potentially lethal assistance," the kind required to respond to the attack:

  • Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CJCSI 3610.01A (dated 1 June 2001) This CJCSI states that "In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA. The NMCC will, with the exception of immediate responses as authorized by reference d, forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval.

  • Who here would like to be audited by the IRS?

  • Evidence supporting "official" story is pretty "concrete". Twoofer evidence on the other hand - a big joke.

  • Why did you cheat your taxes?

  • @OperationMockinghimself,

    Another completely baseless accusation, Twoofer. A better question is why did you destroy the hopes of your parents? Also, yet a better question is why Twoofers like you feel compelled to accuse innocents, like the FDNY, of mass homicide?

  • @Twoofer wordgeezer,

    My "theory" is that Twoofers are idiots.

  • You're a little mixed up Kang. My reply was to Pomaroo's silly question.

    Or do you really think that Alex Jones is Ronald Wiecks corporate master?

  • Yes wordgeezer, Twoofers suck. I can't speak for Ron, but I imagine Alex Jones is not Ron's corporate master. Ron is professional and articulate. Jones is a fat-ass. In fact, I thought Jones was your corporate master, Twoofer. Aren't you Twoofers the goofs that believe in Jones' horridly comical CD theory? The theory where thermite melts pools of steel for months?, The theory with FDNY "pulling" WTC7, thus being complicit?

  • As a matter of fact, Kang, I have no theories. How will I know the truth if I don't document concrete evidence of what happened on 911? I suppose that it is your job to convince folks that the abundant evidence, that shows there were extreme temperatures, is a hallucination, but the melted guns and concrete are in the NYPD museum for all to see.

    What's your theory on that sort of unimpeachable evidence or are you, maybe, going to start observing instead of debunking

  • It's because the Neocorporate criminals don't have to pay unless they want to. You on the other hand have to continue serving their crap, to innocent shumans, even if you don't want to...( :

  • I agree with wordgeezer, Twoofers are morons.

  • Neocorporate criminals such as Dylan "Braindead" Avery and Alex "Listen to my bonehead show while I eat pancakes and gravy" Jones illegally profit from 9-11 conspiracy theory nonsense. They should be incarcerated.

  • kangtimeloser, wordgeezer and ronald wieck in a viscious circle jerk. the 3 stooges who swallow without hesitation. The epitome of stupidity.

  • Seigu007,

    And yet after eight years of shrieking, your evil movement has produced NOTHING--not one shred of evidence for your stupid fantasies. Where are the errors of science in the NIST reports? Who in the worldwide community of structural engineers dissents from NIST's conclusions?

    Your mindless braying underlines your incurable ignorance. Your lies have been exposed; you are reduced to endlessly recycling them on tiny internet forums that nobody reads.

    It's over: The good guys won.

  • @RonaldWieck

    Youve just committed two of the most common logical fallacys known in academia, and those are;Ad hominem coupled with a tu quoque agument therefore proving all of your assumptions wrong.

  • Fabulous--an ignorant fool invoking terms used in formal rhetoric. You know as much about logic as you know about engineering: NOTHING.

    None of my assumptions are wrong, as you know, because they are supported by real evidence.

    What real evidence do you have for your idiotic fantasies? Still nothing, huh?

  • @Twoofer SeigoonIQ7,

    Nice, call me a racist with no proof. You are the worst. I truly hate pricks like you. No doubt, you are the racist.

  • wordgeezer, I am a bit confused as to why youre coming here under the guise of a sincere poster as well AND ASKING A QUESTION THAT YOU ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER TO. Here's hoping you clear up this apparent contradiction.

  • @Seigu007 The argument is over, because youve degenerated into pointlessness.

    Now be a good howler monkey and climb back into your tree.

  • The argument has been over for years. You and your fellow liars don't exist outside tiny internet forums. The frauds and fools who lead you idiots by the nose refuse to confront real scientists and engineers. None of the stupid myths you cling to can stand the slightest degree of scrutiny.

    It's 2010, and all you can do is recycle your pathetic, thoroughly debunked lies. You have absolutely NOTHING.

  • I wonder why my corporate masters don't pay me anything?

  • My NWO/MIC check bounced

  • My problem is much worse. I complain that I don't get any checks; they insist that they send them. It turns out that the checks been going to a Mexican wrestler. The boys in the payroll dept. call it a "glitch."

  • Are you brain dead? I came through to that conclusion through verifiable science, and not psuedoscience such as the explanation you offered up that it is not observable and never was observable.

    Go back to your fairy tales and quit while youre still behind.

  • No, I am not brain-dead. I am far smarter and more knowledgeable than you. The evil movement you serve has NO verifiable science behind it. It is a tissue of pseudo-science and outright lies. That is why you and your fellow agenda-driven liars have accomplished nothing.

    The real science is supported by the real engineers--you know, the ones your fraudulent masters refuse to debate. Whenever you ignoramuses dare to crawl out from under your beds, you get your butts whipped EVERY TIME.

  • Because you cheated your taxes and are stuck shilling on the Internet for the Global Guardians.

  • Yeah, that must be the explanation.

    The "Global Guardians"? They're a women's basketball team, right?

  • LOL, they won WNBA B-League in 2007.

  • gusmosnas, I'll pass

  • Be not confused glasshoppah,it is all over the googleplex. Try this on the google:

    ronald wiecks skeptic show

  • @gusmosnas Thanks for that... very interesting.

  • Ahh, yes, Truth: I love it, It's four dimensional, unchanging and represents a glimpse of time exactly as it happened in that moment of history.

    To understand it we need concrete evidence, and unimpeachable documentation. All the theories and computer models are worth nothing without it...G:

  • There is concrete evidence and unimpeachable documentation, just you goofy Twoofers reject it.

  • Idiots can never hope to understand because their minds are closed. Over a thousand structural engineers, physicists, fire safety experts, demolition professionals, metallurgists, computer programmers, and materials scientists combined to produce the NIST reports. You rejected their findings without reading them because they are inconvenient to your incredibly stupid fantasy.

    You can't learn from genuine experts because you already know everything without ever studying anything.

  • RonaldWieck is a _sociopath_.

  • And what do you base this on, fool? Because Wieck doesn't fall for your unmitigated Twoofer crap, he's a sociopath? You Twoofers are the ones who accuse innocent people (FDNY, NYPD, etc) of mass homicide to get some sort of perverted jolly out of it and you do it without any concern for those you accuse. And then you get all sensitive when someone dare rebuke your sick Twoofer baloney. Not only are you Twoofers sociopaths, you are hypocrites.

  • Tony was correct on the 2x4 illustration where there would be less impact if the unit wasn't banded together.

    The , "cough cough". rocket scientist compares it to a steamshovel full of water which would flatten a car, but fails to mention that being poured or in the form of rain the water would have very little effect.

    Then dismisses video proof by offering graphic representation, re: NIST computer model. Is Mackie preaching to the choir or what? ) :

  • What I find fascinating is the monumental stupidity on display by both Szamboti & Twoofer wordgeezer. Hiding explosives, CD machinery in above ceiling tiles? Wha? I think Szamboti may be high. wordgeezer's sheepish devotion to Szamboti quite disturbing, edging on "blind faith" mentality.

  • Mackey is a real rocket scientist, just as you are a real ignoramus.

  • Hmmm, I imagine that Pomaroo& Mackie would probably disagree with continental drift if their corporate masters required it. Rewriting history is evidently a sideline of the NWO minions...G:

  • You've been caught lying again.

  • @Selgu007,

    Lol, touche'

  • Mackey and Wieck both suffer from the same irreducible delusion. Stupidity masquerading as intelligence.

  • You are mistaken, StooguIQ7. The stupidity resides in you, not the gentlemen you mock. You Twoofers are unbelievable in that you subscribe to the hideous and moronic CD theory. This theory doesn't even make sense. At least come up with something reasonable, for God's sake.

  • Typos:

    fear of my like --> fear of my life

    Thanks is all --> That is all

    That is all.

  • kangtimemoron, you should quit while you're ahead.

  • About a month ago, I asked Wieck a simple clarification question: where is NISTs analysis of the actual collapse of the twin towers? It grew into a challenge.

    I ended up calling a structural engineer. He pretty much agreed that Wiecks confusing and contradictory statements did not lead to that analysis. He concluded that the analysis must reside somewhere in the 10,000 pages of that NIST published, but did not want to look for it.

    So Wieck seems to leave my question unanswered.

    Love,

  • Yo, ask your structural engineer what he has worked on - names of bridges, buildings, etc.  I would like to know so that I may avoid them, for fear of my like.

    Thanks is all,

  • You've been caught lying again, dunce. No structural engineer alive can fail to find NIST's exhaustive analysis of the collapses. Your imaginary friend is nameless for a reason. No competent professional shares your bizarre pathology.

  • Seek the truth my friends, no matter what you are called.

    Call for an investigation my friends, no matter how much time & $ is spent on the cover-up.

  • @CJOKUSAP,

    Actually, Ron is one of the more lucid posters here. What do you contribute? I hope you're not one of those boneheads who goes for goof Twoofer CD theory.

  • Why can't that Ron Weick fellow keep quiet? He's not adding anything to the actual exploration of the subject.