Looniest Of All 911 Conspiracy Theories

[Mike in Denver]

Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski

Really? According to whom? In a controlled demolition the explosions would be visible and uniform around the building and would occur BEFORE THE BUILDING COLLAPSES. That's because the SPEED OF LIGHT is faster than the material.

Ugggh!

Liberal arts majors shouldn't try this, JP. The speed of light is about 300,000 kilometers per second. That is, about 186,000 miles per second. There is no human on earth, and probably no camera that could detect a visual difference in timing of events at the distance to the WTC of an observer.

You are smart JP, but don't overreach.

Enkidu

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Originally Posted by evilisgood

According to you.
The explosions are uniform, right across the same floor. The charges were evidently put on the interior beams which were the stronger ones and necessarily had to be destroyed for the building to come straight down in a heap. And that's exactly what happened!!!

No they are not uniform in the manner that controlled demolitions are uniform and visible. Those clearly aren't even explosions.

Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski

No they are not uniform in the manner that controlled demolitions are uniform and visible. Those clearly aren't even explosions.

The photo clearly shows uniformity-the squibs blowing out right across the same floor. What's not uniform about it??? And I got banned from Sean Hannity's Forum in 4 hours. What took you so long???

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Originally Posted by evilisgood

The photo clearly shows uniformity-the squibs blowing out right across the same floor. What's not uniform about it??? And I got banned from Sean Hannity's Forum in 4 hours. What took you so long???

Anyone who calls that "uniform" or believes that looks like "squibs" has either never seen a controlled demolition or doesn't understand English.

[Hate Dept.]

Originally Posted by FranzJoseph

... they also have a professional military that knows how to think and they just aren't buying Bush's tommyrot.

"Even Finland" LOL. As if there's a long list of countries.

This is just some so-called "military expert", one man. It's not the Finnish Military. There are civilian hacks on the local news who are "military experts". Get real!

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Originally Posted by Hate Dept.

"Even Finland" LOL. As if there's a long list of countries.

This is just some so-called "military expert", one man. It's not the Finnish Military. There are civilian hacks on the local news who are "military experts". Get real!

They'll get a Finnish "military expert", a Russian general, a physics professor a pilot- anybody BUT A DEMOLITIONS EXPERT!

Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski

Anyone who calls that "uniform" or believes that looks like "squibs" has either never seen a controlled demolition or doesn't understand English.

You didn't answer the question: what isn't uniform about it???

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Originally Posted by evilisgood

You didn't answer the question: what isn't uniform about it???

LOOK-AT-IT, COMPARE-TO-VIDEO-OF-REAL-DEMOLITIONS.

Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski

LOOK-AT-IT, COMPARE-TO-VIDEO-OF-REAL-DEMOLITIONS.

Do you know what uniform means?

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Originally Posted by evilisgood

Do you know what uniform means?

The opposite of random.

The truth that there is a lot more going on in the world than what your television tells you is going to dawn on everyone sooner or later, whether they like it or not. Believe what you will but when that violent awakening of yours comes, don't say no one told you.

Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski

The opposite of random.

Not exactly but close enough. Now go back and look at the photo again and see where the arrows are pointing. That dust and smoke coming out of that floor are basically uniform which means that the explosives on the beams in the center of the building all blew at close to the same time so that the upper floors fell straight down in a heap. There probably was more of the same on other lower floors as the building fell.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Originally Posted by evilisgood

Not exactly but close enough. Now go back and look at the photo again and see where the arrows are pointing. That dust and smoke coming out of that floor are basically uniform which means that the explosives on the beams in the center of the building all blew at close to the same time so that the upper floors fell straight down in a heap. There probably was more of the same on other lower floors as the building fell.

The building is in the process of collapsing at that point; demo charges go off BEFORE the building begins to collapse. See the problem is that you are looking at a collapsing building(the WTC) and not a building that has been demolished.

Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski

The building is in the process of collapsing at that point; demo charges go off BEFORE the building begins to collapse. See the problem is that you are looking at a collapsing building(the WTC) and not a building that has been demolished.

This wasn't an ordinary demolition, it was a demolition done on a burning, damaged building. You are right, the building was collapsing at the point that the photo was taken but that doesn't mean that charges weren't being set off as it fell to bring it straight down. Once the building began falling (I believe from charges in the impact area or just below) charges were set off in sequence on lower and lower floors, otherwise the building would have tipped and not have come straight down. This also explains the near free fall speed in which it fell.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Originally Posted by evilisgood

This wasn't an ordinary demolition, it was a demolition done on a burning, damaged building. You are right, the building was collapsing at the point that the photo was taken but that doesn't mean that charges weren't being set off as it fell to bring it straight down. Once the building began falling (I believe from charges in the impact area or just below) charges were set off in sequence on lower and lower floors, otherwise the building would have tipped and not have come straight down. This also explains the near free fall speed in which it fell.

Do you have any proof of this or are we just supposed to take your word for it. I don't suppose it would be asking too much for you to explain how they managed to rig the building with demolitions without hundreds of people noticing.

[Fissile]

Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski

Do you have any proof of this or are we just supposed to take your word for it. I don't suppose it would be asking too much for you to explain how they managed to rig the building with demolitions without hundreds of people noticing.

Don't you know anything?

The mossad stole the Romulan's invisibility cloak. Just ask Mr. Spock, he'll tell you.

Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski

Do you have any proof of this or are we just supposed to take your word for it. I don't suppose it would be asking too much for you to explain how they managed to rig the building with demolitions without hundreds of people noticing.

I don't have documents or taped phone conversations or emails or explosive residue or video tape of people rigging the beams with TNT so I can't prove it that way. But I think that the Laws of Physics and the Laws of Probability strongly indicate that it would have been extremely improbable for those buildings to collapse the way they did without help.
The building could have been rigged over time, it's no big deal to have offshift workers doing shit in any given building, I used to work in them offshift myself and had free rein through most of the buildings.There have been plenty of witnesses reporting that there were unknown workers in those buildings offshift-some supposedly doing cable work. I heard a guy who lived near there across the river in Jersey say that he had a view of the buildings and noticed that they had a much higher number of lights on in the weeks before and he thought it strange. Rigging the building would not have been a problem.

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Originally Posted by evilisgood

I don't have documents or taped phone conversations or emails or explosive residue or video tape of people rigging the beams with TNT so I can't prove it that way. But I think that the Laws of Physics and the Laws of Probability strongly indicate that it would have been extremely improbable for those buildings to collapse the way they did without help.

Lots of qualified engineers say otherwise.

Originally Posted by evilisgood

The building could have been rigged over time, it's no big deal to have offshift workers doing shit in any given building, I used to work in them offshift myself and had free rein through most of the buildings.There have been plenty of witnesses reporting that there were unknown workers in those buildings offshift-some supposedly doing cable work. I heard a guy who lived near there across the river in Jersey say that he had a view of the buildings and noticed that they had a much higher number of lights on in the weeks before and he thought it strange. Rigging the building would not have been a problem.

Rigging for demolitions isn't that simple. It can take MONTHS to do a much smaller building and it involves drilling and knocking out walls. That is why I said the conspiracy writers need to get demolitions experts to build a model of what would need to be rigged so that we could determine how they could do it secretly. Oh, why no whistleblowers in the conspiracy?

Originally Posted by J.P. Slovjanski

Lots of qualified engineers say otherwise.
Rigging for demolitions isn't that simple. It can take MONTHS to do a much smaller building and it involves drilling and knocking out walls. That is why I said the conspiracy writers need to get demolitions experts to build a model of what would need to be rigged so that we could determine how they could do it secretly. Oh, why no whistleblowers in the conspiracy?

Lots of qualified engineers said the world was flat.

I didn't say it would have been simple, it surely took an effort, but they had the resources to do whatever it took. There are no insider whistleblowers because they either don't give a shit or they know they'd be toast. Why no insider whistleblowers on JFK? Why no insider whistleblowers on Pearl Harbor?

[J.P. Slovjanski]

Originally Posted by evilisgood

Lots of qualified engineers said the world was flat.

They certainly weren't engineers nor scientists, and that is completely irrelvent.

Originally Posted by evilisgood

I didn't say it would have been simple, it surely took an effort, but they had the resources to do whatever it took. There are no insider whistleblowers because they either don't give a shit or they know they'd be toast. Why no insider whistleblowers on JFK? Why no insider whistleblowers on Pearl Harbor?

Thousands of people involved in the most deadly conspiracy in American history and not ONE leak, not ONE whistleblower, not ONE piece of hard evidence. Amazing.