Thoughtless WTC Conclusions

Discussion in '9/11' started by Kokomojojo, Mar 2, 2019.

  1. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Yet here you are quoting and replying to my posts day after day.

    Yeah, you're not interested. Maybe you'll believe that one day. If you're not interested put me on ignore then. That'll fix that right up.
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2019
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  2. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    For me, the evidence is overwhelming that plane impact damage and fires brought down the buildings. For you there is and never will be any evidence that contradicts the conspiracy theory you believe in.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  3. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    "Can sound like high explosives" eh?

    Can you post eyewitness testimony were they say they heard "explosions due to high explosives" and how they know the difference between those and other explosions?
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  4. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,958
    Likes Received:
    377
    Trophy Points:
    83
    LMAO
    Guessing games? Nah, I gave you the benefit of a doubt and an opportunity to show off your briliance.

    Gam, 3 buildings all suffered simultaneous global loss of support.
    Its impossible for fire or any other natural cause to do that.
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    1,190
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah I can tell.

    Your "logic" leaves a lot to be desired. It seems to serve only one purpose, to defend the OCT at all costs.

    You sure are, except there's no reason to. The most likely realistic option for explosions are explosives, the most realistic option you desperately want to avoid.

    No such luck. I've always told you I use you for my agenda. Thanks for your help.

    That's the OCT in a nutshell. Just post the link to the 9/11 Commission Report and especially the NIST reports.

    That's illogical. The OCT IS a conspiracy theory, one you believe is fact and one I know is a fairy tale made for the gullible. What I know is also true and well supported by overwhelming evidence is the conspiracy to portray the OCT as fact and suppress or demonize anything that questions or contradicts it. The method of destruction of the 3 WTC towers on 9/11 is not conspiracy theory, it's merely collapse theory. And the NIST reports that promotes one collapse theory is based on proven fraud so it is an invalid theory. OTOH the collapse theory based on controlled demolition is well supported by not only deductive reasoning, physics (and other sciences), history, eyewitness testimony and expert testimony but also by video and physical evidence, among other things.
     
  6. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    35,493
    Likes Received:
    27,319
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, it is NOT impossible because it ACTUALLY HAPPENED!

    For starters they were NOT "simultaneous". Try looking up the meaning of the term next time.

    Secondly the supports on the towers themselves were seriously DESTROYED by the plane impacts which MASSIVELY INCREASED the LOADS on the remaining supports. Those remaining supports where then subjected to UNCONTROLLED HEAT EXPOSURE to the point where they WEAKENED beyond their factor of safety and failed.

    Building 7 was an UNCONVENTIONAL building structure that was subjected to UNCONTROLLED HEAT EXPOSURE because of the tower collapses. The FAILURE of one beam caused a cascading collapse of the rest of the building.

    Too bad that NONE of the Conspiracy truthers understand even the basics of Applied Math and Strengths of Materials.

    Then again if they did they would NOT be truthers.
     
  7. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Bobby's a mind reader now?

    And yours seems to be to defend the demolition conspiracy at all costs.

    There's is no forensic/physical evidence of demolition charges used. That's a fact. Without this evidence your belief in them is fantasy.

    :roflol:

    Just post the forensic/physical evidence of demolition charges that you believe in so much.

    No, it's not.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  8. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    They did? You mean all three buildings each lost all connections and support from ground level to top in the same instant?

    That's idiotic.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  9. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Hey Koko, you missed post #153
     
  10. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
  11. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,958
    Likes Received:
    377
    Trophy Points:
    83
    as it 'poured' down the shaft, tell us how that happens, how do you get a fireball from pouring a fuel that is hard to light down a shaft.
    Not so, not in a crowded real world.
    Oh yes I do!
    Show me pictures of everything that was damaged so I can see if there was enough damage to cause a failure. What fires in WTC2?.
    I did better I posted a video clip of high explosives several times and you conveniently pretend nothing has been posted.
    I'm sure you believe that. LOLOLOL
    You dont know that is what happened. Oh, think you do? Post dont and stop vanishing everytime I ask for your evidence.
    but the fires had mostly went out in wtc 2 because the sprinklers were working
    I missed nothing.
    again I missed nothing you failed to respond to my rebuttal. 'again'
     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    1,190
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry but that's not my agenda, you are thoroughly confused. Despite reading hundreds of my posts and posting exactly what my agenda is, even one very recent post, it seems you're still clueless.

    There's no forensic/physical evidence supporting the OCT. That's a fact. Without this evidence your belief in the OCT is fantasy. Both the 9/11 Commission and NIST skipped that step in their "investigations", remember?

    Cute childish cartoon but cartoons are for children. Aren't you past grade school? Cartoons do nothing to support an argument, in fact , they do just the opposite.

    I post what I want to post, not what you dictate I should post. As often posted, my objective is not to try to support every theory out there. That the 3 towers were demolished via controlled demolition is the only possibility left when no one can prove any other cause. And that's because only controlled demolition is fully capable of totally destroying those 3 towers in the manner they were destroyed. That's been proven many times in the real world. No other possible known cause can accomplish that. No other cause has ever been shown to do that in any possible way. It's simple deductive reasoning and common sense. Try it sometime.

    Deductive reasoning and common sense are 2 forms of universally accepted logic, whether you like it or not.
     
    Eleuthera and Kokomojojo like this.

Share This Page