Some New Shit - Page 49

Titanium Cat · 06-07-2008, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvidoo

When are you going to scrounge around in that litter box and come up with some new material? This is about the zillionth time you've used this increasingly tired one. Aren't you getting even the littlest bit bored yet?

No not at all. When some fool actually thinks that steel columns couldn't have been severed by a 200 ton jet travelling 500mph, and repeatingly maintains that steel always wins over aluminum, it's no problem bringing it back up.

How about you Duvi, are you bored?

Ptech · 06-07-2008, 09:16 PM

No sir, I'm not "admitting" that there are no pictures of this.

I'm TELLING you that there are at least hundreds of pictures of that.

It is neither my obligation nor my inclination to educate you, other than these linkless sentences. If you care not about educating yourself, that's YOUR problem sir, not mine.

Titanium Cat · 06-07-2008, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ptech

I don't give a flying fuck whether either of you two get this, OR NOT.

Does it really MATTER how fast aircraft are moving in hangars?

Ummm, yes it really does MATTER!

Quote:

Very damn slow. Does that answer your childish question there TC?

No dummy, it wasn't a childish question. Very damn slow is why the steel wasn't damaged. For I don't know how many times, collision energy increases with the SQUARE of the VELOCITY. Do you understand what that means?

Quote:

And if you want to see pictures of the exoskeleton being blown out sideways, go to pilotsfor911truth.org, then find under the Media section in the forums a piece about Richard Gage being interviewed on a Canadian TV station. They show it several times.

Still can't find the actual page, tch tch.

Quote:

We are discussing historical events here gentlemen, not potential or hypothetical events. What happened has happened whether you two understand it, are aware of it, OR NOT.

Historical events that you seem to have difficulty providing links for.

Quote:

You guys are in serious denial, or you are grossly uninformed on what happened that day. Just to put things in perspective, because the government REFUSED to have an impartial and proper investigation, there are hundreds, probably thousands of private individuals with detailed knowledge in many specialties, that have been investigating the events of the day IN SPITE OF the government having done its best to get rid of most of the physical evidence.

You guys are apparently completely unaware of these many investigations and what they have uncovered.

You guys are still in the caveman era in terms of what's been discovered.

Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11, and Please Lord, let us NEVER open our eyes. Amen.

Bush is evil! Yes we know, for the twoofers tell us so.

Apparently you are in the pre-caveman era in your ability to actually link or reference what all these investigations have uncovered.

Amen!

Titanium Cat · 06-07-2008, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ptech

No sir, I'm not "admitting" that there are no pictures of this.

I'm TELLING you that there are at least hundreds of pictures of that.

It is neither my obligation nor my inclination to educate you, other than these linkless sentences. If you care not about educating yourself, that's YOUR problem sir, not mine.

Then why do you bother coming here if you don't want to actually provide the information?

We know you are ignorant about physics, why should we assume any differently about anything else?

PursuitOfHappinessParty · 06-08-2008, 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ptech

Yeah POHP, we Troofers aren't into that physics thing.

We're not into how buildings can fall down at free fall rate,

I don't really see how getting struck by a speeding airliner turned into a bomb is 'fall(ing) down at free fall rate', I'd call that terroristic demolition. After the buildings rather tremendous weight is compromised by the support's damage and all.........

Quote:

or how big pieces of structural steel can be displaced horizontally by gravity.

They didn't. There is a tad bit more to physics than gravity. Try googling kinetic energy for your first hint at what REALLY happened. You see, that much energy gained from the 'free fall' created by the incredible weight and even distance creates the energy necessary to displace mass when it's being jammed into too small an area by that aforementioned gravity. That which is physically impossible to go down must go sideways.

Quote:

Then again, neither are you.

I shant get snotty, because I like you and have many quality posts with and against you. Suffice to say that I have a much better grasp of physics than you if your posts are an example of your knowledge.

Ptech · 06-08-2008, 07:36 AM

TC

I enjoy coming here and talking about this to watch people like you defend the indefensible. Call it perverse pleasure--I'm guilty. And I'm also guilty of poor linking abilities. YOU are guilty of not really being interested in discovering what happened that day.

That you and Brian have not read of or seen pictures of the pieces of tower exoskeleton impaled upon surrounding buildings is testimony to your lack of knowledge/exposure to the facts of the case. You regurgitate the government story quite well, but independently acquired knowledge does not seem to be your strong suit.

POHP

Have you seen pictures of the exoskeleton pieces?

Have you seen the presentation by Richard Gage? Do you give any credence to the opinions of architects and engineers?

brian_wilbanks · 06-08-2008, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PursuitOfHappinessParty

I don't really see how getting struck by a speeding airliner turned into a bomb is 'fall(ing) down at free fall rate', I'd call that terroristic demolition. After the buildings rather tremendous weight is compromised by the support's damage and all.........

There was no free fall speed of the building itself. Pick a picture....any picture of the collapse of either tower and you can see that the debris is falling faster than the main structure. Ptech must be a fan of the "klunkety klunk" lady.

Quote:

They didn't. There is a tad bit more to physics than gravity. Try googling kinetic energy for your first hint at what REALLY happened. You see, that much energy gained from the 'free fall' created by the incredible weight and even distance creates the energy necessary to displace mass when it's being jammed into too small an area by that aforementioned gravity. That which is physically impossible to go down must go sideways.

All the debris that I see has fallen in a parabolic curve. True there is some lateral motion, but there is not one single picture or video of a steel beam beaing blown perpenidular to the building at the distance claimed by our "special" friend.

In order to blast a steel beam 500 feet like he claims, there would have to be a huge explosion. An explosion of that magnitude would be impossible to miss. The so called squibs that the truthers always cite as explosions just crack me up.

YouTube - Homemade cannon...part one

brian_wilbanks · 06-08-2008, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ptech

TC
That you and Brian have not read of or seen pictures of the pieces of tower exoskeleton impaled upon surrounding buildings is testimony to your lack of knowledge/exposure to the facts of the case. You regurgitate the government story quite well, but independently acquired knowledge does not seem to be your strong suit.

I've seen em....but that doesnt mean they were blown stright outward by explosive force.

You have 100 million pounds collapsing. Use your head beavis, this isn't a dog house that we're talking about here.

Ptech · 06-08-2008, 07:53 AM

OK Brian, you are starting to get it.

Yes, there was a huge explosion. Actually many perfectly sequenced explosions. Heard and reported by many, recorded on film, and denied by certain people.

brian_wilbanks · 06-08-2008, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ptech

OK Brian, you are starting to get it.
Actually many perfectly sequenced explosions. Heard and reported by many, recorded on film,

Post them then.....so we can compare them to my next post.

06-07-2008, 09:16 PM	#482 (permalink)
Ptech Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Fort Pierce FL Posts: 1,304 Thanks: 35 Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts	No sir, I'm not "admitting" that there are no pictures of this. I'm TELLING you that there are at least hundreds of pictures of that. It is neither my obligation nor my inclination to educate you, other than these linkless sentences. If you care not about educating yourself, that's YOUR problem sir, not mine.
	Top

06-08-2008, 07:36 AM	#486 (permalink)
Ptech Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Fort Pierce FL Posts: 1,304 Thanks: 35 Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts	TC I enjoy coming here and talking about this to watch people like you defend the indefensible. Call it perverse pleasure--I'm guilty. And I'm also guilty of poor linking abilities. YOU are guilty of not really being interested in discovering what happened that day. That you and Brian have not read of or seen pictures of the pieces of tower exoskeleton impaled upon surrounding buildings is testimony to your lack of knowledge/exposure to the facts of the case. You regurgitate the government story quite well, but independently acquired knowledge does not seem to be your strong suit. POHP Have you seen pictures of the exoskeleton pieces? Have you seen the presentation by Richard Gage? Do you give any credence to the opinions of architects and engineers?
	Top

06-08-2008, 07:53 AM	#489 (permalink)
Ptech Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Fort Pierce FL Posts: 1,304 Thanks: 35 Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts	OK Brian, you are starting to get it. Yes, there was a huge explosion. Actually many perfectly sequenced explosions. Heard and reported by many, recorded on film, and denied by certain people.
	Top

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode