Hard Evidence

Discussion in '9/11' started by Shinebox, Sep 10, 2016.

  1. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Do any of you "truthers" have any hard evidence for your claims? ... I'm not talking lack of evidence which is mostly what you parrot, but actual hard evidence of controlled demos, not the real planes, hijackers still alive, Jewish involvement ... I will gift you the possible Saudi involvement ... but that takes away your theories completely ...

    Go!
     
  2. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    63
  3. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,193
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If I were genuine, I would ask a different question, where is the "hard evidence" for NIST's claims (theories as they admit)? But if you're really looking for "hard evidence", it's right here, lots of it. It's hard evidence because it's NIST's own official publications, letters and videos. It's hard evidence that NIST manipulated, lied and obfuscated. It is irrefutable evidence because it's NIST's own evidence.

    http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/458597-nist-9-11-scam-exposed-all-its-glory.html
     
  4. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    can you speak for yourself or do you rely on YouTube videos?

    - - - Updated - - -

    nice dodge Bob ... I kind of expected it though ...
     
  5. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,816
    Likes Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Research is research. Whose it is doesn't matter.

    That link is full of hard evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.


    Tell us what you think of the security video analysis described at the 2:13:36 time mark of this video.

    September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M


    That looks like pretty hard evidence to me.
     
  6. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,193
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What's a "dodge" to you is FACT to those who care about 9/11. The claim that the US government concealed, lied and otherwise deceived the planet about 9/11 is loaded with FACTS/HARD EVIDENCE, only the blind, ignorant and/or cognitive dissonant DENY the HARD EVIDENCE and ask questions designed to steer away from the FACTS/HARD EVIDENCE of those irrefutable claims.
     
  7. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Do any of you "deniers" have any hard evidence for your claims of a steel core? ... I'm not talking lack of evidence which is mostly what you parrot regarding the structural core but actual hard evidence of the steel core columns in the core area from. 9/11. Not the misrepresented construction photos, that are too far away to identify structural elements.
     
  8. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I guess deniers have no hard evidence supporting the official story about a steel framed core structure.

    Here is some hard evidence for the core that existed. There is more.

    The 2001 safety report for FEMA by August Domel identifying a concrete core. Domel is certified in 12 states as a structural engineer. See page 5.

    http://algoxy.com/psych/images3/domel_safety_report.ncsea.down.pdf

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    How about some hard evidence of controlled demolition ... traces of termite/thermate? ... a witness seeing someone cutting into walls to access columns and beams or workers stringing wire? ...

    sure NIST is flawed but it is not hard evidence of anything ...
     
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,193
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Or even a recording of the Bush personally claiming he wired the towers for CD. Shhhh, don't tell anyone but they got rid of as much hard evidence as they could and as quickly as they could.

    It's hard evidence that NIST is flawed and their theory is worthless garbage (other than to placate the ignorant and gullible). It's also hard evidence that no legitimate official scientific investigation (or any kind for that matter) was ever conducted on the 9/11 event. It's also hard evidence that the US government officially accepts the illegitimate NIST theory as fact and peddles it as such. You keep looking for the wrong kind of hard evidence, the type that's difficult if not impossible to come by because you know it was deliberately destroyed.
     
  11. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    1,146
    Likes Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    48
    the workers exposing columns/beams to perpetuate the CD's were deliberately destroyed? ... as were the witnesses/security guards who saw this going on? ... conspiracy that big Bobby? ...

    keep droning on about NIST Bobby ... that's you're forte' ... "deliberately destroyed" ffs ... your crank theories would take a whole lot of people in on the scam ...

    :roflol:
     
  12. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Not sure what you're getting at. You seriously expect people who disagree with you about 9/11 to have pieces of rubble lying around to prove their point?

    "Carefull, honey, don't clean that WTC steelbeam I got on ebay...I might need to to disprove conspiracies on the Interwebs."

    ????:confusion:
     
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,193
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wrong question again and as always, no one is asking that but you, at least not yet. The correct question should be "The building was totally destroyed in a nearly identical manner as a CD by fire alone?" That question is being asked by millions who want to know the truth because they haven't gotten a legitimate answer.

    Once again, no one is asking that question either ... yet. The bigger question is who is really responsible for 9/11? Millions are asking that question because they haven't gotten a legitimate answer.

    Yes it was a conspiracy, that's a fact no matter what else you want to believe. And the official story? Yeah it's nothing more than theory. And we know that because we haven't gotten a legitimate answer.

    And why do you keep droning/praising the OCT? You yourself said "NIST is flawed", did you not? So what makes NIST's theory valid to you if NIST is flawed? Does that make any sense to you?

    I don't have any crank theories, that the US government lied about 9/11 is fact, not "crank theory", it's backed by HARD EVIDENCE. You know, the kind you're asking for. Oh I know, it's not really what you're looking for because you're busy trying to swat everything out there that doesn't agree with the official theory. I and I'm sure millions of others want to know exactly who was involved. That would tell us exactly how many people were knowingly involved. I personally don't care about how many but I definitely care about who, not mention why, how, when and where. And that's because we haven't gotten a legitimate answer. Whether you believe a legitimate answer can come from a FLAWED organization or not is your problem, not mine. I think to most level headed people, it's not even a question worthy of asking.
     
  14. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male

    Note the OP and the wording of my post you quote.

    I'm mocking the OP because the deniers can't even prove the core structure the official story defines.

    It's a lie that is shared with the icons of conspiracy theories. LOL!
     
  15. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    This coming from the guy who "identified" 3" diameter rebar jutting out from his supposed concrete core from a photo taken from miles away?

    :roflol:
     
  16. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Talk about a lie! Below is your diagram trying to explain your concrete core garbage.
    [​IMG]

    Here is a section of your pedestal/core that I have drawn, looking down the long axis.
    [​IMG]

    How in the world are your 10' thick concrete core walls being held up? How do the express elevators pass through those same core walls? You've been at this for so long and changed your made up fantasy so many times that you can't keep track of the lies you've told!
     
  17. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    You mean the truths I've supported with independently verified evidence.

    [​IMG]
    Bottom left corner annotation indicate walls perpendicular to long axis face which bear on pedestal and are joined into core wall.

    Your ability to use engineering concepts is highly deficient. Then again you support secret methods of mass murder and treason as an internet stalker against truth.

    https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=8808&page=34

    Your turn to post a picture of the steel framed core inside the core area on 9/11.

    I post an image of the WTC2 core at 1/2 height with NO exterior steel floors around it.

    [​IMG]
     
  18. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Scaled distance is 7500 feet.
    [​IMG]

    What else could it be other than rebar? On 4' centers that's 25 of them per long side. What, you think its going to be invisible at 7500 feet?

    LOL!

    Where is the steel framed core? No wonder you did not post the rebar pic!

    The safety report of August Domel from November 2001. See page 5 for the description of the concrete core.

    http://algoxy.com/psych/images3/domel_safety_report.ncsea.down.pdf
     
  19. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Show me a quick section sketch because you're making no sense. Where were the 10' thick and 12' thick concrete core walls located above the mezzanine level in relation to the supposed pedestal, express elevators, and core columns?? How did the elevators pass through the 10' thick core wall along the long axis?

    That's because the falling debris stripped the floors from the steel core!

    :roflol:

    You're concrete core is a physical impossibility as i have shown MANY times. Your core doesn't fit anywhere! It's pure fanrtasy! How about you use your "skills" to draw a coherent diagram that actually shows what your describing? You're WTC2 core diagram stinks on ice!

    - - - Updated - - -

    So you're telling me that something 3" in diameter would be THAT big in a photo taken from 7500 feet (almost 1.5 miles) away?!

    :omg:
     
  20. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,023
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    No, you will have to use the perspective view with your feeble mind that supports mass murder and treason. That is what the perspective view is for. It's two drawings in one.

    Oh while you are at it, post a pic of the steel framed core from 9/11. Below is the concrete core of WTC2.

    [​IMG]

    LOL! Wrong pic. You somewhat correctly describe what happened in the above pic with the CONCRETE CORE.

    But I was asking where the steel framed core is in this pic.

    [​IMG]
     
  21. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    :roflol:

    I did! I created a section view from your picture! Your description is completely impossible! How can the elevators go up THROUGH your supposed concrete core walls?!

    :roflol:

    You didn't think your fantasy through did you?
     
  22. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    No answer? I didn't think so...
     
  23. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Here is your diagram that I annotated...
    [​IMG]

    Here is my plan view using the corresponding annotations of each piece...
    [​IMG]

    Tell me Chris. Using my plan, how does the orange elevator pass THROUGH your supposed blue, 10' thick concrete core wall? That concrete wall would block the path of all 23 express elevators on either side of your concrete pedestal!!!!!

    :roflol:
     
  24. l4zarus

    l4zarus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ah gotacha. I've been Poed. :smoking:
     
  25. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,332
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Speaking of lies, can you tell me why you lied about this photo that was on your website back in 2011?
    [​IMG]

    Concrete core of the North tower?!?!?!? Here's a website with that same photo...
    http://www.courrierinternational.com/article/2010/08/11/a-quoi-bon-une-mosquee-a-ground-zero

    Here's a great picture of that same core you tried to pass off as the "north tower core". From this website towards the bottom: http://blogs.sacbee.com/photos/2010/09/ground-zero.html. It was taken on July 15th 2010!!!!
    [​IMG]

    The amount of lying you go through to try and pass off your concrete core crap...

    Pathetic...
     

Share This Page