ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags danny jowenko

Reply
Old 2nd December 2009, 06:21 PM   #361
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Truthers display an amazing double standard and inability to view their arguments from another perspective.

Case in point: Bard's response to the fact that American demolitions experts and their teams were actually onscene, and have the skills and experience to recognize evidence. Instead of conceding the importance of their testimony, he resorted to a vague dismissal/smear
'Professionals can be genuinely wrong, and professionals can be dishonest. '

Of course, he wouldn't be able to see that his statement applies to Jowenko as well as Blanchard. Nor can he allow that Blanchard was actually there at GZ, and that makes his observations far less superficial than Jowenko's.

He's not the worst. I've seen truthers deny that Blanchard knows anything about CD's, since he has never demolished a building himself, only monitored demolitions. One person suggested he was just a photographer, not a CD expert.
Another claimed that Mark Loizeaux is working secretly for the conspiracy, and might have actually wired the buildings!!

Anything but accept these experts might indeed by correct (they most certainly are, IMHO), and that truther's assumptions might be wrong (they most certainly are).

This stuff is pretty low-grade denial, it's not even sophisticated enough to address the actual points made by Blanchard and Loizeaux. Now I guarantee you, as sure as butter comes from a cow, that if Blanchard was testifying that explosives WERE used in the towers, truthers would be crowing from the rooftops about him, as they do with Jowenko.

It's almost funny, except it's so sad. This willful blindness extends everywhere in trutherdom, right down to Tony Szamboti's ill-fated choice to ignore and deny the tower tilts.

Yeah, we should confront Jowenko with the absence of seismic, audio and visual corroboration of CD and see what excuses he can make for it. He really ought to go head-to-head with another demo expert on hardfire or something.
That would be worthwhile.
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'

Last edited by alienentity; 2nd December 2009 at 06:24 PM.
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2009, 06:32 PM   #362
Edx
Philosopher
 
Edx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 5,642
Getting Jowenko to talk to someone who knows what they are talking about would be nice.

If we could get him to admit that actually WTC7 only looks a little bit like a CD if you see only a few select videos with the sound off not knowing anything about it, it would be pretty funny.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2009, 07:54 PM   #363
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post

Professionals can be genuinely wrong, and professionals can be dishonest.

Yes we know

http://www.voicesofsafety.com/fe/don...ref-1-p-1.html

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com...-engineer.html



__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Donít get me lolín off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2009, 09:10 PM   #364
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
Truthers display an amazing double standard and inability to view their arguments from another perspective.
Snipped the rest for brevity... but yeah. And truthfully material on all of these topics is pretty easily accessible without ever having to touch a "government document" if their paranoia runs that deep. I for one am glad I kept every textbook I've bought since starting college in '05. It's some of that very study that demonstrated how insane the premise of some these theories are based on, and they give an excellent context to what's being claimed by the authoritative CT nuts.
__________________
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 04:44 AM   #365
bardamu
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 547
Originally Posted by twinstead View Post
Do we get to crash huge fully-laden passenger jets into them first?
Even your fairy tale doesn't depict a passenger jet flying into WTC7, or fully-laden ones flying into the towers.


Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
NIST may perhaps have been aware of the absence of enormous hydraulic jacks in the WTC towers. Since no other explosive-free method of building implosion is known, and buildings are known to collapse as a result of fire, it's clear to the sane that NIST considered the only realistic possibilities.
NIST ruled out the possibility of controlled demolition on the basis that there was no evidence of loud explosions, flashes or broken windows. No mention of hydraulic jacks in the NIST report, as far as I'm aware.


Originally Posted by Oliver View Post
Did any local JREF Truther actually contact Mr. Jowenko yet?
[That's what I would do in case of any doubts concerning WTC7]
Ron Wieck spent an hour with him on the phone, then gave up after realizing he was dealing with a man of integrity.


Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
You can speculate until hell freezes over about what CD methods might have been used, but you have no proof to back that up, and no proof against the conventional understanding.
Really, you're just repeating the usual tired talking points, with some new and unsuccessful spin on verinage.

I give you a fail. Not convincing in the slightest.

Have you ever thought about where you're going with all these vague allegations and speculation? Do you expect something to come out of it, and if so, what? Without some real conclusive evidence, there will be no criminal charges against anybody. Just imagine what a grand jury would think if they heard this kind of fluff, and try to imagine what kind of case you'd be trying to bring.

You've really got nothing substantial, my friend. Someday perhaps you'll come to your senses. Someday soon I hope.
Show me evidence that the interior columns of WTC7 failed progressively over a period of 7 seconds. The evidence I've seen shows that one column failed, then all the rest failed around 7 seconds later. NIST and some people here must have x-ray eyes.


Originally Posted by alienentity View Post
Yeah, we should confront Jowenko with the absence of seismic, audio and visual corroboration of CD and see what excuses he can make for it. He really ought to go head-to-head with another demo expert on hardfire or something.
That would be worthwhile.
He doesn't have an axe to grind. He just gave his honest and expert opinion and he'd probably prefer to be left in peace now.
bardamu is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 05:06 AM   #366
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
 
funk de fino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
The Fire Department sacrificed their own.

Thats a scumbag claim.
__________________

Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase.
funk de fino is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 05:11 AM   #367
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
Even your fairy tale doesn't depict a passenger jet flying into WTC7, or fully-laden ones flying into the towers.
Are you nuts? Those planes were FULL of fuel for a trans continental flight. Also, a HUGE chunk of the WTC smashed into WTC7. Neither of which were included in your idiotic hyperbole I was addressing. Even if the planes were HALF full of fuel, which they were not, does that mean you get to ignore them because they are inconvenient?

The only thing worse than being wrong is being arrogantly wrong. Congratulations.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 10:06 AM   #368
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
NIST and some people here must have x-ray eyes..
In the absence of evidence of an alternative cause its a reasonable conclusion given the building's performance. If you feel otherwise, tough love.
__________________
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 10:19 AM   #369
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
In the absence of evidence of an alternative cause its a reasonable conclusion given the building's performance. If you feel otherwise, tough love.
NIST admitted that it didn't look for an alternative cause because it would have been a waste of time since evidence of it wasn't there to begin with.

Do you catch that carousel of logic?
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 10:23 AM   #370
dtugg
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,885
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
and far inferior to a theory which is supported by physical evidence.
Originally Posted by Gamolon View Post
What theory to you subscribe to concerning WTC7 and what physical evidence supports it?
Originally Posted by dtugg View Post
I predict that RedIbis will not be answering this question. Too bad stating the obvious does not qualify one for the MDC.
Shockingly, my prediction has thus far turned out to be correct.
dtugg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 10:25 AM   #371
9/11 Chewy Defense
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
NIST admitted that it didn't look for an alternative cause because it would have been a waste of time since evidence of it wasn't there to begin with.

Do you catch that carousel of logic?
Can you explain why NIST is fully involved in fire protection Red?
9/11 Chewy Defense is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 10:45 AM   #372
lapman
Graduate Poster
 
lapman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,717
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
NIST admitted that it didn't look for an alternative cause because it would have been a waste of time since evidence of it wasn't there to begin with.

Do you catch that carousel of logic?
What an idiotic statement. Do they usually look for evidence of a hand grenade while they investigate a shooting incident? BTW, they did look at the alternative. Guess what, no evidence.
__________________
They take their paranoia, mix in a healthy dose of mistrust in anything "gubmint", and then bake it in that big ole EZ Bake oven of ignorance, and come to the delusional conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job. - Seymour Butz
lapman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 10:54 AM   #373
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by 9/11 Chewy Defense View Post
Can you explain why NIST is fully involved in fire protection Red?
Ha. Fully involved. Fire. Get it?
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 12:40 PM   #374
TruthersLie
This space for rent.
 
TruthersLie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,715
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
NIST admitted that it didn't look for an alternative cause because it would have been a waste of time since evidence of it wasn't there to begin with.

Do you catch that carousel of logic?
Can you please tell me any type of "alternative" evidence which would have been overlooked in the piles?

Huge hydraulic jacks, with hydraulic pumps?

huge amounts of det cord and explosive residue?

any of that would have been found by the people handling the debris.

Nist said it wouldn't look for EXPLOSIVES because any explosive large enough to cut core columns would have had a 140DB explosions which would have been caught on any video camera within a mile. And guess what... there were NO explosions caught on ANY tape that match that description.

so was it silent explosives?
TruthersLie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 12:44 PM   #375
Trojan
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 490
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post

The Fire Department sacrificed their own.
Wait a second -- the NYFD is complicit in the murder of their own?

Is this your claim?
Trojan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 12:45 PM   #376
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by Trojan View Post
Wait a second -- the NYFD is complicit in the murder of their own?

Is this your claim?
Oh yea, you read it right. He's a little sweetheart, ain't he?
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 12:46 PM   #377
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
Originally Posted by TruthersLie View Post
Can you please tell me any type of "alternative" evidence which would have been overlooked in the piles?

Huge hydraulic jacks, with hydraulic pumps?

huge amounts of det cord and explosive residue?

any of that would have been found by the people handling the debris.

Nist said it wouldn't look for EXPLOSIVES because any explosive large enough to cut core columns would have had a 140DB explosions which would have been caught on any video camera within a mile. And guess what... there were NO explosions caught on ANY tape that match that description.

so was it silent explosives?
You mean "any explosive" like RDX? Who proposed that as an alternative other than NIST?
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 12:58 PM   #378
TruthersLie
This space for rent.
 
TruthersLie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,715
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
You mean "any explosive" like RDX? Who proposed that as an alternative other than NIST?
PLEASE, I am BEGGING you provide me with another "explosive" which can cut steel beams that is silent.

I'll wait for it. ANY explosive capable of cutting those beams. I'd love to know what it is.

Really. That is what you have? That is it?

super duper stealth explosives? Really?

It would help if you PROPOSED ANYTHING besides for just JAQing off. PROPOSE something.
TruthersLie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 02:26 PM   #379
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
NIST admitted that it didn't look for an alternative cause because it would have been a waste of time since evidence of it wasn't there to begin with.

Do you catch that carousel of logic?
Are you implying that the NIST should have also looked into space beams and missiles? Why not earth quakes? THe WTC collapses registered on the Richter scale after all. Maybe the NIST should have investigated those too. Naw, could never be due to something a little more obvious than having a series of engineering disasters from an intentional terrorist attack right?...
__________________

Last edited by Grizzly Bear; 4th December 2009 at 02:31 PM.
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 02:45 PM   #380
bardamu
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 547
Originally Posted by Trojan View Post
Wait a second -- the NYFD is complicit in the murder of their own?

Is this your claim?
Some of them must have been in on it, or at the very least they kept quiet after the fact.


Originally Posted by funk de fino View Post
Thats a scumbag claim.
Please don't shoot the messenger.


Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
Are you implying that the NIST should have also looked into space beams and missiles? Why not earth quakes? THe WTC collapses registered on the Richter scale after all. Maybe the NIST should have investigated those too. Naw, could never be due to something a little more obvious than having a series of engineering disasters from an intentional terrorist attack right?...
They should have eliminated the impossible, which includes a fire-induced progressive collapse.
bardamu is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 02:47 PM   #381
dtugg
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,885
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
Some of them must have been in on it, or at the very least they kept quiet after the fact.




Please don't shoot the messenger.
Edited by Gaspode:  Removed breach of Rule 12

Last edited by Gaspode; 4th December 2009 at 03:19 PM.
dtugg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 03:27 PM   #382
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
They should have eliminated the impossible, which includes a fire-induced progressive collapse.
Are you sure I'm the one you should be making this case to? I suggest you contact the writers of the International Building Code and inform them with justification that their requirements on fire protection have no merit. I'm sure if your being truthful they'll seriously consider the implications of what you're saying, well providing anyway that your statement isn't of course a bald assertion or one of ignorance.
__________________
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 03:30 PM   #383
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,494
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
Some of them must have been in on it, or at the very least they kept quiet after the fact.

Please don't shoot the messenger.
No one is shooting anyone here. Though you may want to avoid Farrell's Bar in New York City:

Firefighters and their unions don't hesitate to demand that safety issues be addressed. At Farrell's bar in Brooklyn, which is a firefighter and cop hangout, I asked one of New York's Bravest how he would respond to someone who said the 9/11 first responders were keeping quiet about what killed their brothers. He laughed, shook his head, and said, "There better not be a Halligan around. I'd put it through his <CENSORED> skull." At the center of Farrell's back bar stands a cross made from WTC steel and a portrait of longtime Farrell's bartender Vinny Brunton, a FDNY Captain with Ladder 105, who died on 9/11.

Firefighters don't appreciate people spewing that kind of hateful ignorant garbage about them and the honored dead. I'm surprised (and impressed) that Triforcharity held back as much as he did.

Last edited by Sword_Of_Truth; 4th December 2009 at 03:33 PM.
Sword_Of_Truth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 03:32 PM   #384
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,494
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
They should have eliminated the impossible, which includes a fire-induced progressive collapse.
You don't even know what a progressive collapse is.

Shouldn't you figure that out before you declare it impossible?
Sword_Of_Truth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 03:32 PM   #385
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
Some of them must have been in on it, or at the very least they kept quiet after the fact.
Of course. They MUST have. It's the only explanation. God forbid you actually take a step back and consider that you just might be full of crap.


Quote:
Please don't shoot the messenger.
The messenger? THE MESSENGER? Dude. You're a member of a small, insignificant cult. You're too irrelevant to be a messenger. You're just the internet version of the bearded old man on the street corner telling us the world's going to end, and we're all going to hell. Don't flatter yourself please.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 03:51 PM   #386
Trojan
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 490
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
Some of them must have been in on it, or at the very least they kept quiet after the fact.

I would love to see you go to a NYFD station and make that statement.

That you would make this allegation with no evidence shows you to yet another truther with no integrity.
Trojan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 05:11 PM   #387
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,374
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
Some of them must have been in on it, or at the very least they kept quiet after the fact.
I'll give you this much bardamu, as despicable as your allegations are, at least you've got the courage of your convictions (if lacking the courage to act on them), and at least enough cognitive capacity to go where a controlled demolition scenario would logically have to take you.

But clearly, if 9/11 was a conspiracy involving the FDNY, it also must have involved every other agency and organization connected to the events of that day before, during, and after the attacks. This would include, but not be limited to: NIST, FEMA, the FBI, the FDNY, the NYPD, the Port Authority, Interpol, the worldwide mainstream media, the worldwide scientific community, and the worldwide law enforcement community.

And let's not forget the general worldwide population, who despite the supposedly overwhelming evidence favoring an inside job, haven't even lifted a finger to so much as protest such gross and insidious abuses of power.

So I ask you this: If everyone not involved in such a thinly-veiled conspiracy is too amoral or apathetic to do anything about it anyway, what was the point of the conspiracy to begin with?

For whose benefit was this elaborate charade?

Last edited by johnny karate; 4th December 2009 at 05:12 PM.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 05:15 PM   #388
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
I'll give you this much bardamu, as despicable as your allegations are, at least you've got the courage of your convictions (if lacking the courage to act on them), and at least enough cognitive capacity to go where a controlled demolition scenario would logically have to take you.
I have to agree with this. At least bardamu has realized the implications of his accusations and just lets it all out, if only superficially. I suspect now he will find out why so few truthers actually come out and say what they really feel; eventually it becomes obvious that everybody is in on it. That kind of realization must be scary for them.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 09:17 PM   #389
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
Some of them must have been in on it, or at the very least they kept quiet after the fact.
Oh, right, but yet we will rush into a burning building for complete strangers, but, god forbid we stand up FOR OUR OWN ******* FAMILY!!

You obviously do not know how close of a bond we have for other firefighters. I would die for any one of the people I work with, and wouldn't hesitate one second. Not even one. Its clear that you have never felt this type of love before. Its actually somewhat sad really.

Any evidence?? I would love to see it.


Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
Please don't shoot the messenger.
I cannot respond to this, as if I did, I would SURELY be banned from here in an instant.

Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
They should have eliminated the impossible, which includes a fire-induced progressive collapse.
Why? Why is it impossible for fire to weaken steel??
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2009, 09:26 PM   #390
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
No one is shooting anyone here. Though you may want to avoid Farrell's Bar in New York City:

Firefighters and their unions don't hesitate to demand that safety issues be addressed. At Farrell's bar in Brooklyn, which is a firefighter and cop hangout, I asked one of New York's Bravest how he would respond to someone who said the 9/11 first responders were keeping quiet about what killed their brothers. He laughed, shook his head, and said, "There better not be a Halligan around. I'd put it through his <CENSORED> skull." At the center of Farrell's back bar stands a cross made from WTC steel and a portrait of longtime Farrell's bartender Vinny Brunton, a FDNY Captain with Ladder 105, who died on 9/11.

Firefighters don't appreciate people spewing that kind of hateful ignorant garbage about them and the honored dead. I'm surprised (and impressed) that Triforcharity held back as much as he did.
I'd pay for his trip, if he agreed to let me post the aftermath on youtube.

Believe me, it is taking alot not to respond the way that I would like to. As I said above, I would be banned instantly from this forum.

Bard,

I would HIGHLY reccomend you do NOT do this. I guarantee you, that it would not end well for you.

PS, if you do decide to go to FDNY and try this, PLEASE let me tag along. I promise, you'll be (in)famous afterward.
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2009, 01:39 AM   #391
TruthersLie
This space for rent.
 
TruthersLie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,715
Originally Posted by bardamu View Post
They should have eliminated the impossible, which includes a fire-induced progressive collapse.
They did eliminate the impossible.

Unless you can provide explosives capable of cutting steel beams the size of those in wtc1,2 and 7 that is silent.

Do you have some twoof? I'd love to find some.

They eliminated the idea of thermite because it can't cut through steel beams horizontally, obliquely or simultaneously.

They didn't even think of super duper nanothermite because it didn't exist in enough quantities to do anything to the towers

they didn't think of death beams from outer space because they are not morons.

they also didn't test for giant lizard **** (so that means godzilla did it), or giant moth **** (mothra did do it I tell ya), pixie dust (tinkerbell did it).

The properties of steel and fire have been known for centuries...

Failed science again eh? Must be like High school for you ALL OVER AGAIN.
TruthersLie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2009, 06:20 PM   #392
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
Are you implying that the NIST should have also looked into space beams and missiles? Why not earth quakes? THe WTC collapses registered on the Richter scale after all. Maybe the NIST should have investigated those too. Naw, could never be due to something a little more obvious than having a series of engineering disasters from an intentional terrorist attack right?...
Well red? What are your thoughts? I'm a curious guy...
__________________
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2009, 06:52 PM   #393
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by TruthersLie View Post
they didn't think of death beams from outer space because they are not morons.
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2009, 07:14 AM   #394
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
Well red? What are your thoughts? I'm a curious guy...
Your questions are hypothetical and disingenuous, why would I respond to them?
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2009, 08:09 AM   #395
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by RedIbis View Post
Your questions are hypothetical and disingenuous, why would I respond to them?
What? You mean like more disingenuous than first time occurrences being impossible?
__________________
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2009, 08:11 AM   #396
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
What? You mean like more disingenuous than first time occurrences being impossible?
Just ask your question in a reasonable way and I'll try and answer. For one, I never said first time occurances were impossible.
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2009, 08:59 AM   #397
TruthersLie
This space for rent.
 
TruthersLie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,715
Bump for red ibis. Come on... answer the questions. Don't run away again.
Originally Posted by TruthersLie View Post
PLEASE, I am BEGGING you provide me with another "explosive" which can cut steel beams that is silent.

I'll wait for it. ANY explosive capable of cutting those beams. I'd love to know what it is.

Really. That is what you have? That is it?

super duper stealth explosives? Really?

It would help if you PROPOSED ANYTHING besides for just JAQing off. PROPOSE something.
Please provide an example of any explosive capable of cutting steel silently.
TruthersLie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2009, 09:38 AM   #398
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
Originally Posted by TruthersLie View Post
Bump for red ibis. Come on... answer the questions. Don't run away again.


Please provide an example of any explosive capable of cutting steel silently.
I think the word you overlooked in my post was 'reasonable'.
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2009, 09:44 AM   #399
triforcharity
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 13,961
Yes, providing a sample of an explosive cutting steel that is also silent IS unreasonable.

That might be the first thing I have ever seen you get right!!
WOO HOO!!! Now, just if we could get you to correct the other 498 things you get wrong daily.
triforcharity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2009, 09:53 AM   #400
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 10,493
Red believes the U.S. government is complicit in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Red believes the U.S. government is complicit in the murder of 3000 people on 9/11.
Red believes the U.S. government is complicit in the worst crime in U.S. history.

He will only accept "reasonable" questions, clearly a patriot committed to seeking justice.
Please, don't ask Red any questions which might make him squirm or question his delusional mentality.
__________________
For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive.
DavidJames is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:35 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.