[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff
KSM got a plea deal. The guy who supposedly masterminded the 9/11 attacks is not getting the death penalty.
If you still
Imagine looking at photos like this and not getting to feel what we feel when we see them:
You mean an erection, right? Did I mention I really like Swiss cheese?
Captain Cumming.
Earth rise.
All makes sense now.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
This is desperate avoidance of the result. And distraction ofc.For info about how shear stress works, see first explanation. If you cannot understand that then go and read an intro to mechanical engineering - materials under stress and strain.For a KE calc see the AI solutions.It cannot happen, unequivocally. The holes were not caused by falling debris.If there is confusion ove
You've once again confused me, Sillybilly.
I thought you've carefully instructed us to "trust the experts", and not to "use our own judgement" and/or "observe the photographs."
Seems a bit dishonest to me.
Sorry, but anyone that doesn't realize the Artemis and Apollo missions were 100% real is a fing dmbass.
And that's just a fact.
It's worse than you think. Not only did we never go into outer space, it's been proven that it's impossible for airplanes to achieve sufficient lift and speed to fly across the Atlantic Ocean. All trans-Atlantic flights are fake.
What about his “pancake theory is impossible” but here is a picture of a “meteor.” made of 4-5 floors pancaked together.
Trust the photos/don’t trust the photos - which is it?
What about his “pancake theory is impossible” but here is a picture of a “meteor.” made of 4-5 floors pancaked together.
Trust the photos/don’t trust the photos - which is it?
Trust the photos. "Pancaking" (discarded theory even by NIST) cannot cause enough heat and pressure to fuse the meteor and similar objects.
A DEW (directed energy weapon) caused the steel, concrete and office materials to fuse together. The same weapon caused the otherwise unexplained holes in the adjacent buildings. This is consistent with constructive and destructive interference patterns caused by wave phenomena. The amplitude is greatest at the target WTC1 and 2, while lower peak amplitudes caused the damage to peripheral buildings.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Trust the photos. "Pancaking" (discarded theory even by NIST) cannot cause enough heat and pressure to fuse the meteor and similar objects.A DEW (directed energy weapon) caused the steel, concrete and office materials to fuse together. The same weapon caused the otherwise unexplained holes in the adjacent buildings. This is consistent with constructive and destructive interfere
Loooool, space lasers for the win! He finally admits it! I guess the only question left is whether the planes actually hit the buildings al9ng with the space lasers. I am betting in a month he will admit he doesn’t believe the planes were real.
What about his “pancake theory is impossible” but here is a picture of a “meteor.” made of 4-5 floors pancaked together.
Trust the photos/don’t trust the photos - which is it?
There is a good two-part answer to that question:
1. Trust the photos if they seem to confirm Billy's thesis.
2, Do not trust the photos if they do not seem to confirm Billy's thesis.
This ain't rocket science, dude!
This 9/11 cultist (you gorgo) did not receive the memo.
The pancake buffoonary was dropped from WTC1 and 2. But it is still claimed that WTC1 pancaked 4 or 5 floors to cause the meteor and other smaller meteor-type blocks of fused concrete and steel that then went and ejected from the falling buildings pile driving their way through WTC6 and other buildings causing the massive holes.
Feeling cheated? Yeah that's because you are. This epic contradiction, both pancaking and no-pancaking, does not matter. Because useful idiots like you will lap up whatever nonsensical dumbfeckery they concoct.
Pancaking was not ditched from WTC6. It is alleged, by some freakish non-physical incident, to have pancaked due to falling debris. So we will have seen a series of pancaked floors at the bottom of WTC6 together with the separately pancaked meteor of fused steel and concrete that spat out of WTC1 that caused the pancaking of WTC6, amirite?
Nope. Of course not. Not a pancaked floor nor a meteor to be found there. The meteor, the main alleged hole causing culprit was found "somewhere around ground zero".
Needless to say, there is not a shred of evidence to suggest that the meteor and the other fused blocks were ejected from WTC1 and 2 as they fell. Indeed, the ejected material was pretty flimsy. (And I know you dont like this fact, but it also turned largely to dust. But forget about that uncomfortable truth).
Where is the video footage of the massive hunks of fused steel and concrete that caused the holes? It is beyond absurdity, this narrative you have believed.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Correct. Then why did you say NIST discarded this theory? Did you think we were talking about WTC1 pancaking? Surely you weren't that confused.
Just a mistake then?
It is pretty funny that researching the meteor indicates that the experts are unable to say which WTC tower it came from nor do they claim it damaged WTC6. Only silly billy makes such claims. And with his rejection of their explanations about the meteor. he falls back on a DEW theory that has no support in the evidence or even that they exist.
It is pretty funny that researching the meteor indicates that the experts are unable to say which WTC tower it came from nor do they claim it damaged WTC6. Only silly billy makes such claims. And with his rejection of their explanations about the meteor. he falls back on a DEW theory that has no support in the evidence or even that they exist.
I honestly feel like he was talking to himself when he said:
I am amazed when Deuces, Billy and Luckbox make those kinds of statements after stating something that they know is an idea or belief that only the 1%, super special people with amazing sight from information from the internet believe.
Correct. Then why did you say NIST discarded this theory? Did you think we were talking about WTC1 pancaking? Surely you weren't that confused.
Just a mistake then?
No dickhead, see below.
1. WTC1 and 2 originally said to have pancaked.
2. Story then changed to not-pancaked but inward buckling. Amounts to same thing but what the hey, they said this.
3. The "meteor" always was claimed to have formed from the pancaking of 4 or 5 WTC 1 floors (or wtc2 - will return to Trump's point next post).
4. A piece of pancaked debris, such as the "meteor" or similar fused object, is said to have fallen onto WTC6 and sheared the entire building from top to bottom. This is said to have been a pancaking of WTC6 floors. But from photographic evidence it is most definitely a shearing effect, as with all the "strange holes".
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
It is pretty funny that researching the meteor indicates that the experts are unable to say which WTC tower it came from nor do they claim it damaged WTC6. Only silly billy makes such claims. And with his rejection of their explanations about the meteor. he falls back on a DEW theory that has no support in the evidence or even that they exist.
This is pretty laughable.
See map for starters.
If anything was to fall on WTC6 it would have come from WTC1 for an obvious reason.
I did not say the meteor fell on WTC6. It is highly unlikely that a mass of that size would receive a lateral push of great enough magnitude to force it outwards onto WTC6. What force would you claim caused material to be ejected outwards from WTC1? Air pressure? Is this likely to cause an object this massive to shoot outwards given it has supposedly been formed from some intense heat and *downward* pressure? It then suddenly ejects sideways onto WTC6?
Ok so that is highly unlikely. So what debris might have caused the hole in WTC6? Objects of considerably smaller mass. Therefore even less likely to penetrate WTC6 8 floors down over an area of 42 square metres.
The reason I chose the meteor is because it is the biggest piece of debris that could possibly have caused the WTC6 hole. It could not have done so, therefore NO piece of debris could cause the WTC6 hole.
What you have done is emphasised the unlikelihood of my steelman argument. Which weakens your own argument considerably.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Look at this.
This is WTC5. Note its location on the map above.
Do you seriously believe these holes were caused by ejected debris from WTC1 and 2? If so, how?
Do you understand that the heavier the material is the less likely it is to travel this distance from WTC1 or 2?
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Easy tiger. You get everything wrong again.
Not by NIST
2. Story then changed to not-pancaked but inward buckling. Amounts to same thing but what the hey, they said this.
No story was changed. The mechansim of collapse has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that a bunch of debris punched a whole in the top of WTC6 and pancaked the floors. You believe utter lunacy.
The reason I chose the meteor is because it is the biggest piece of debris that could possibly have caused the WTC6 hole. It could not have done so, therefore NO piece of debris could cause the WTC6 hole.
The staggering level of stupidity it takes to pick out a single piece of debris amongst an entire building collapsing and calculate that it alone could not have caused the damage (with literally laughable physics) therefore nothing from the building could have caused it is unfathomable.
This is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. It would be like me dropping a wheelbarrow full of gravel on your car from the roof of a building, finding the largest rock and then claiming the wheelbarrow full of gravel didn't damage your car because the largest rock couldn't have broken your windshield if you just placed it on it.
That's how incredibly stupid you sound right now.
