This forum is in read-only mode for archive purposes, please use our new forum at https://community.justflight.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Just Chat > Just Chat - General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - A little something for my fans...
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

A little something for my fans...
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
kamakazi View Drop Down
P/UT
P/UT
Avatar

Joined: 02 Jun 2008
Location: sweden
Points: 165 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kamakazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: A little something for my fans...
    Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 8:58am
A few months ago I suggested some films about the global elites and their agendas, my thread was viciously attacked and smothered in denial.
 
New evidence supporting my belife that 9-11 was staged to some degree have emerged. You might find it an interesting read since it is a peer reviewed scientific study.
 
 
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:12pm

No it's not pier reviewed?

 

One bonkers chemist, known to be a proponent of the 9/11 conspiracy and a few of his pals.

 

Pier reviewed, means that numerous independent researchers conduct proper scientific studies and all come to the same conclusion. And in addition, the data relating to the research is made freely available.

 

The article once again refers to the freefall nonsense that was disproven the last time you made an appearance.

 

I’m afraid, you can’t cherry pick nonsense from the internet and claim it to be scientific proof of anything.
Back to Top
VulcanB2 View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Points: 13365 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VulcanB2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:24pm
I've shown you stuff that is peer reviewed and you still wrote it off!

Best regards,
Vulcan.
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:24pm
And here's the idiocy of it, how could 100 tonnes of an explosive be planted in the WTC without anyone being aware?
 
 
Quote

Interviewer: What quantities are we talking about?

Harrit: A lot. There were only two planes, but three skyscrapers collapsed. We know roughly how much dust was created. The pictures show huge quantities, everything but the steel was pulverized. And we know roughly how much unreacted thermite we have found. This is the "loaded gun": material that did not ignite for some reason. We are talking about tonnes. Over 10 tonnes, possibly 100 tonnes.

He goes on to say...
 
Quote The actual collapse sequence had to be perfectly timed, all the way down.
 
So how can 100 tones of explosive be installed in the building, and wired in such a sophisticated way as to be 'perfectly timed' without anyone knowing?
 
Clearly beyond implausible.
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:27pm
I've shown you stuff that is peer reviewed and you still wrote it off!
 
No you haven't!
 
Pier reviewed by respected scientists and engineers please. And not misquotes, exaggeration and pseudoscience.
 

 

If this guy really does have properly conducted research that suggest the use of so called nanotermite, then he should submit his findings to respected scientific journals. If he does that e.g. Nature, and the majority of other experts agree with the research, then I'll take it seriously. Not until!
Back to Top
VulcanB2 View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Points: 13365 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VulcanB2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:28pm
I didn't mean WRT to 9/11...

Best regards,
Vulcan.
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:35pm
If you mean global warming Vulcan then it's a small percentage of the experts that have misgivings, not the majority. Furthermore, the misgivings are frequently exaggerated and downright distorted by the CT idiots.
 
Frequently I read of complaints from researchers that have had their research mis quoted by CT proponents, twisted to make it appear to be anti global warming. When it reality it's more to do with time scales and degree of consequences.
Back to Top
VulcanB2 View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Points: 13365 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VulcanB2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:36pm
I watched this with the sound off, FYI.

I don't care about the actual presentation, or the presenters, only the actual video of the WTC contained therein, so let's not try and side-track this discussion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wVLeKwSkXA

There are plenty of other videos showing this stuff. Note that this is PRIOR to collapse.

Why is a glowing orange substance dripping from the WTC??

Best regards,
Vulcan.
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:46pm

Molten metal indeed.

 

How can you tell its molten metal form a blurry video at such distance? There's no proof it's molten metal at all. It could easily have been any material hanging from the structure. Even if it was a molten material, how do you know its metal, or the metal from the structural beams? You don't, it's unscientific guesswork.

 
I don't see you jumping to the conclusion that it was a plastic or aluminium filing cabinet meting in the heat do I.
 
Any combustible material hanging from a structure swaying in the breeze and rising hot air, if out of focus and glowing would appear that way.

 

Just another individual trying to cash in on the conspiracy with speculation and pseudo science.

 

Whenever you watch this nonsese think MONEY, it’s the prime motivator.
Back to Top
VulcanB2 View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Points: 13365 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VulcanB2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:48pm
They weren't the ones holding the camera at the time.

Best regards,
Vulcan.
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 1:50pm
Not a clue what you mean!
Back to Top
BradS View Drop Down
First Officer
First Officer
Avatar

Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Location: KIND
Points: 347 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BradS Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 2:29pm
<tossing another bone on the pile>

For something interesting to ponder when things are slow, take a look at the aircraft impact at the Pentagon.  Right after the impact (within 30 minutes) all of the external surveillance cameras in the neighorhood were taken by the government (pretty fast reaction after such an event), and the video was never allowed to surface.  There was one video that did surface, taken in the Pentagon parking lot, that just happened to be pointing directly where the plane hit the building.

  • By some analysis, the size of the plane in the video is not the same as the one that is claimed to have it the Pentagon; its much smaller.
  • If the size of the plane in the video is used, there is not enough mass in that plane to have caused the damage to the Pentagon alone.
  • During recovery of the plane pieces, there was not enough accounted for to account for a large aircraft as was originally claimed, nor of the right types.
  • The actual depth of penetration of the plane into the Pentagon, did not match what either the original claimed aircraft, or the one on the video.
  • In the Twin Towers, fuel from the aircraft is claimed to have burned so got that the superstructre of the building was compromised, which lead to the collapse.  Yet, in the Pentagon, there was no such fire and extreme heat, even though both planes were of similar size.

BBC put together a pretty decent documentary on this not long after it happened.  It wasn't shown here in the US, except on a few Talking Heads shows.......
--------------------------------
Brad   
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 8:37pm

Brad, for someone I assumed to be intelligent you surprise me.

 

Yes there was a BBC documentary… it did a great job of disproving all this juvenile nonsense.

 

There's a great saying...

 

‘An open mind is a good thing, but not so open that your brain falls out.’ Wink
Back to Top
Magic Man View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: South Wales
Points: 5336 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Magic Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 8:42pm
Originally posted by kamakazi kamakazi wrote:

A few months ago I suggested some films about the global elites and their agendas, my thread was viciously attacked and smothered in denial.
 
Nope, it was shown to be a crock of rubbish smothered in something brown and smelly that anyone with an ounce of common sense could see.
 
And, since you never came back to that thread - where you proudly boasted you never lost I seem to remember - guess what? You lost...Wink
Back to Top
VulcanB2 View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Points: 13365 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VulcanB2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 8:45pm
Quote Brad, for someone I assumed to be intelligent you surprise me.

Why? Does thinking that the US Government might just be lying about 9/11 suddenly equate to low intellect?

They lied about Iraq. Do I really have to dig this up again?

I'm going to stop derailing the thread here.

I agree with you that the Pentagon is odd. So is Flight 93. There are plenty of photos of the aftermath of the Pentagon crash, showing aircraft parts that are claimed to be engines etc.. yet have been identified by the manufacturers involved as not being from their engines. Who is right? I'd say the manufacturers.

There is another point that needs further investigation - NONE of the aircraft apparently had APUs. Odd considering they are quite significant little units. There is no mention of them in any report.

Best regards,
Vulcan.
Back to Top
Magic Man View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: South Wales
Points: 5336 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Magic Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 8:52pm
Originally posted by VulcanB2 VulcanB2 wrote:

Quote Brad, for someone I assumed to be intelligent you surprise me.

Why? Does thinking that the US Government might just be lying about 9/11 suddenly equate to low intellect?
 
To do what they would have had to do when there were far simpler methods to achieve the same result, yes, common sense has to figure a little here.
 
Quote
They lied about Iraq. Do I really have to dig this up again?
 
Exactly, you've just proved the point. If you believe they lied about WMD etc. then how simple was that. Didn't have to think up some scheme, didn't have to kill any Amercians on their own soil, didn't have to hope that the thousands that would have been required to keep quiet for something like 9/11 didn't leak anything. A simple lie and they get to go to war... Why couldn't they have done similar for 9/11?
 
Quote There is another point that needs further investigation - NONE of the aircraft apparently had APUs. Odd considering they are quite significant little units
But if this was an American Goverment consipiracy, then why would they remove them if they indeed weren't in place?
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 9:04pm
Why? Does thinking that the US Government might just be lying about 9/11 suddenly equate to low intellect?
 
No Vulcan, it's ignoring the trained, qualified structural engineers, ignoring the logical facts, ignoring the plausible explanations, ignoring the impossibility of installing tons of explosives and detonation cable unseen, and believing the nonsense on the CT web sites that does.
 
And worst of all... falling for the bigest money making con of all.
 
They lied about Iraq. Do I really have to dig this up again?
 
Thats believable, thats feasible, 9/11 CT isn't.
 
I agree with you that the Pentagon is odd.
 
Nope, CT theorists are odd. I won't go into the Pentagon, you have been thrashed to death on that plenty of times before. Do a search.
 
There is another point that needs further investigation - NONE of the aircraft apparently had APUs. Odd considering they are quite significant little units. There is no mention of them in any report.
 
Oh my god, you're right. And no one mentioned a myriad of other components either. They must have been beamed up by aliens.
 
Back to Top
Magic Man View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: South Wales
Points: 5336 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Magic Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 9:09pm
Originally posted by MartinW MartinW wrote:

And no one mentioned a myriad of other components either. They must have been beamed up by aliens.
 
Yep, I believe seat 34B wasn't mentioned a single time. What about that eh...? Makes you think doesn't it...
Back to Top
MartinW View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 26722 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MartinW Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 9:11pm
Shocked
Back to Top
CyprusAirwaysA330 View Drop Down
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Avatar

Joined: 02 Apr 2008
Location: London
Points: 1829 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CyprusAirwaysA330 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Apr 2009 at 9:41pm

Oh dear, another 9/11 conspiracy theory.  Personally, I think this article looks a bit suspect.  Liquid metal flowing out of the buildings?  That would require huge amounts of heat, and even then, the entire metal structure wouldn't just all become molten.

Off-topic: Vulcan, how did you become a beta tester of the A320?   
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down