Jump to content

The Facts of WTC PLANNED & CONTROLLED DEMOLITION


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, wideawake said:

 

Can you explain to me how a commercial plane can enter the WTC through steel columns and not lose ANY parts of the plane on the impact side?  i.e wings and/or wing tips for example.

It goes right through the skyscraper like there was no obstacle encountered.

Nah...

 

It has colossal kinetic energy. What you should be asking yourself is does the edge of the building have enough resistant force to combat that kinetic energy? It does not by a long way.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 440
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

911 was a huge scam. Regardless of the precise details. We all agree it was an orchestrated scam... Don't trust your Government. That we can agree on. Full stop.   

WTC Building 7 Primed for Demolition Prior to the day of September 11th 2001.   There is a video of "Lucky Larry" Silverstein, the owner of the WTC Complex, where he says he had a conversati

By elephant in the room I mean exactly what you're saying in regards to people like Silverstein and his pals. Most normies don't talk about that stuff, they just post jet fuel can't melt steel beam me

Posted Images

10 hours ago, zArk said:

are there sensible experienced people who still believe in the crock of ++++ plane story?

 

Yes, it's an exclusive club for the sensible. It involves logic, reasoning and proper analysis of all evidence. It involves understanding physics properly.

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

even after the well publicised Norman Mineta story about Cheyney

 

http://www.911myths.com/index.php?title=Norman_Mineta

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

even after the infamous Bush in the school watching the plane crash before the video was on TV

 

How does that prove the dumb no planes claim!?

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

even after September Clues fairly well highlighted all the videos

 

September Clues has had the living crap kicked out of it. That's where the sensible people come in with logic, critical thinking and physics.

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

even after  only 2 of the 4 named flights existing

 

You said that before and ignored my response. All 4 flights existed. In one traffic log, two of them were not noted because it was a log of LANDED planes!

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

even after Flight 93 was seen landing Cleveland Hopkins Airport

 

....Sigh.....seek the truth and ye shall find it. Stick with no-plane crap and you never will.....

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/93_landed_in_cleveland.html

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

The videos are fake, 

 

No they aren't. I see we are in to the bare assertion bullshit section.

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

the people interviewed are agents for the narrative

 

No they aren't.

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

the people interviewed on the streets (like harley davidson man) are intel agents

 

No they aren't.

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

 which would place all photographic and video evidence as suspect.

 

Circular logic - that evidence is fine.

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

Sitting analysing fake doctored footage and pictures has those repsonsible laughing their heads off.

 

It's not fake or doctored and I can't imagine anyone laughing if a gang of such "astute" internet detectives are on their case:classic_rolleyes:

 

10 hours ago, zArk said:

Its a great wheeze for them and they love to argue the toss over the images because ... they made them deliberately

 

If you say so.

 

It was planes, four of them.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

 

It has colossal kinetic energy. What you should be asking yourself is does the edge of the building have enough resistant force to combat that kinetic energy? It does not by a long way.
 

 

So the aluminum wings on the planes were stronger then the steel columns?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, wideawake said:

 

So the aluminum wings on the planes were stronger then the steel columns?

 

Not relevant. They carried sufficient kinetic energy to break them. The quantity of fuel in them aided in making them more solid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Haunted Universe said:

 

 

Look at those you suspect of being shills as an opportunity ... If they ask idiotic questions , then the general public could also be asking these , I always address the unseen lurkers , not the suspected shill when replying ....

 

If they ask nothing valid or try to wind you up , just ignore .... 

 

I guess by 'Shill' you mean paid government agent .... not to be confused with Troll , who is just an idiot tying annoy people....

 

Indications of a shill might be someone who believes most official stories , 9/11 etc , and is  feeding FE and no space threads , on either side of the argument. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oz93666 said:

 

Look at those you suspect of being shills as an opportunity ... If they ask idiotic questions , then the general public could also be asking these , I always address the unseen lurkers , not the suspected shill when replying ....

 

If they ask nothing valid or try to wind you up , just ignore .... 

 

I guess by 'Shill' you mean paid government agent .... not to be confused with Troll , who is just an idiot tying annoy people....

 

Indications of a shill might be someone who believes most official stories , 9/11 etc , and is  feeding FE and no space threads , on either side of the argument. 

 

 

Nothing makes sense anymore in this bullshit world, and you can't trust anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Haunted Universe said:

 

 

Nothing makes sense anymore in this bullshit world, and you can't trust anyone.

 

How can you still be posting if you are banned???

 

The controllers will target DI family and forum administrators with mind influence to get them to make wrong decisions ...this forum (and the 2 predecessors )   have a long history of strange goings on , from the outside it often appears management are trying to sabotage things .... In reality they are trying their best. 

Edited by oz93666
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, oz93666 said:

How can you still be posting if you are banned???

 

I was temporarily banned from posting for 2-3 days for calling out a piss obvious shill and antagonizer, and the ban is over.

 

3 minutes ago, oz93666 said:

from the outside it often appears management are trying to sabotage things .... In reality they are trying their best. 

 

 

I'm far from convinced. Lionizing them doesn't make it so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wideawake said:

Now think of it this way... if you could throw the WTC at the plane with the same kinetic energy, would the wings collapse or the steal columns?

It wouldn't make any difference, relative speed is what matters. There's a cutoff point where there isn't enough kinetic energy to break the steel columns:

 

right-corner2.png

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Haunted Universe said:

Just been banned from posting for 2/3 days for "abusive behavior"  - I smell controlled opposition, double standards, hypocrisy and mala fide.

 

I suggest you do what I do, behave myself and just get on with debating.

 

Now, explain to the forum how the "No-plane-perps" designed an explosion to coincide with their fake planes that managed to blow very strong support columns inwards. The kinetic energy from the plane explains it. Your turn.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, FrankVitali said:

ComedyTime's a shill 🙂

 

Nope, but if such a job exists, can you tell me where to apply? Why do people with no answers always complain at the people asking the questions?

 

See post above - I await your non-shill answer....because of course the idea there were no planes is not completely insane at all and doesn't make a mockery of the entire thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

 

I suggest you do what I do, behave myself and just get on with debating.

 

Now, explain to the forum how the "No-plane-perps" designed an explosion to coincide with their fake planes that managed to blow very strong support columns inwards. The kinetic energy from the plane explains it. Your turn.

 

Does it depend how and where the explosive are packed in?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

See post above - I await your non-shill answer....because of course the idea there were no planes is not completely insane at all and doesn't make a mockery of the entire thing.

I think there were planes but the concept that there were not is not insane, they just have a different opinion to you.

 

Please define thing, thank you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, wideawake said:

@Comedy Time

Now think of it this way... if you could throw the WTC at the plane with the same kinetic energy, would the wings collapse or the steal columns?

 

4 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

This was asked before the forum hack and the answer is the same result.

 

Listen, do you have any actual mathematical analysis to support any of this? Because at the moment it's just you doing Ralph from the Simpsons.

 

So that is your answer? I was expecting more from you...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Reet Hard said:

GCHQ careers section on their website.

 

I was being flippant, but since you are playing the smart arse, post a link please.

 

  

2 hours ago, Reet Hard said:

Please define thing, thank you. 

 

No. 

 

  

2 hours ago, Reet Hard said:

Does it depend how and where the explosive are packed in?

 

You tell me! How exactly do you "pack" explosives in to SUCK a bloody support column inwards!

 

No planers make all sorts of hoooohaaaa about how strong the columns are but are shit scared to explain how they went inwards!

 

  

 

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, wideawake said:

So that is your answer? I was expecting more from you...

 

The forces involved are identical....BUT....you cannot sum the kinetic engine of the building in the same way and use it to determine damage. It is a much more complicated sum.

 

I wasn't actually expecting you to post an answer to my request for quantifiable mathematical analysis, so there you go.

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, wideawake said:

@Comedy Time

Now think of it this way... if you could throw the WTC at the plane with the same kinetic energy, would the wings collapse or the steal columns?

 

12 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

 

The forces involved are identical....BUT....you cannot sum the kinetic engine of the building in the same way and use it to determine damage. It is a much more complicated sum.

 

So... still no answer.

I'll tell you what the difference is before you google all day for an answer... none and the wings will collapse, period.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, wideawake said:

So... still no answer.

I'll tell you what the difference is before you google all day for an answer... none

 

Wtf? I gave you an answer! The forces are identical....you just bloody quoted it. And don't talk to me about "googling an answer", you just plagiarised that claim and lifted it from a no planer site.

 

13 minutes ago, wideawake said:

and the wings will collapse, period.

 

And your stunning conclusion for this was reached because? You were doing so well, you got the identical bit, then you seemed to mess up slightly. Show your mathematics for any of it. Because it is a problem of mechanical force and engineering.

 

I await an answer to a whole host of things from any single no-planer...must I list them again?

 

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Reet Hard said:

Possibly but I'm not convinced that's the story with the moderators Haunted Science is complaining about.

 

2 hours ago, Reet Hard said:

If you don't mind me asking What was your previous name Theo?

Comedy Time's was Rupert.

 

MOD NOTE. 

Stop discussing moderation and members. 

Keep on the topic. 

Thanks 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Comedy Time said:

 

Wtf? I gave you an answer! The forces are identical....you just bloody quoted it.

 

 

And your stunning conclusion for this was reached because? You were doing so well, you got the identical bit, then you seemed to mess up slightly. Show your mathematics for any of it. Because it is a problem of mechanical force and engineering.

 

I await an answer to a whole host of things from any single no-planer...must I list them again?

 

So your answer is a question and you criticize everybody else for doing the same. Hmm

 

My conclusion was by logic. Every time on 9/11 discussions ( towers fell on their own footprints, arabs as highjackers, fake planes, Silverstein's insurance racket, the pentagon attack video, unusual crash debris in Shanksville, etc, etc) for some reason, there is no logic anymore but always a long technical, mathematical, scientific answer. Why? 

Because NIST said so?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...