Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
04-11-2009, 04:57 PM,
#46
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Quote:Uhm.... O2 depletion... not WTC7? Or is this topic 9-11 now?

hmm..it's buffeted off course, for sure.
04-12-2009, 11:07 AM,
#47
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Quote:was the average stated. why they just fell like they'd been rigged
They fell just the way Galileo would have expected them to: gravitationally-accelerated...

Quote:what about the 'crimp' of WTC 7 btw?
It couldn't replace the beam it was resting on. It HAD to crimp there...

Quote:"Is this real world or exercise? Is this real world or exercise?"
He didn't know. And the connection was?

Quote:same MO - get's fishy yet?
And the connection (with the natural failure of the buildings) was?

Quote:"We designed the buildings to take the impact of the Boeing 707"
Which they did (and of a larger plane - the 757) - but not the FUEL.

Quote:this engineer knew shit about the buildings
He didn't know the insulation wouldn't be blast-proofed. He didn't account for the FUEL.

Complicity in the destruction of the towers should be enough for anyone. Someone in that administration KNEW that that terrorist act was being contemplated, and even took steps to make it possible.

It isn't even necessary to take the further steps you do, reaching (like chemtrailers) into scientific matters you obviously fail to understand, to make all the absurd claims you make. Your actions weaken your case.

It's a real fait accompli now, anyway, isn't it?
04-12-2009, 02:04 PM, (This post was last modified: 04-12-2009, 02:43 PM by ---.)
#48
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Quote:
Quote:was the average stated. why they just fell like they'd been rigged
They fell just the way Galileo would have expected them to: gravitationally-accelerated...

Quote:what about the 'crimp' of WTC 7 btw?
It couldn't replace the beam it was resting on. It HAD to crimp there...

Quote:"Is this real world or exercise? Is this real world or exercise?"
He didn't know. And the connection was?

Quote:same MO - get's fishy yet?
And the connection (with the natural failure of the buildings) was?

Quote:"We designed the buildings to take the impact of the Boeing 707"
Which they did (and of a larger plane - the 757) - but not the FUEL.

Quote:this engineer knew shit about the buildings
He didn't know the insulation wouldn't be blast-proofed. He didn't account for the FUEL.

Complicity in the destruction of the towers should be enough for anyone. Someone in that administration KNEW that that terrorist act was being contemplated, and even took steps to make it possible.

It isn't even necessary to take the further steps you do, reaching (like chemtrailers) into scientific matters you obviously fail to understand, to make all the absurd claims you make. Your actions weaken your case.

It's a real fait accompli now, anyway, isn't it?


not really, I think you're glazing over serious points somewhat slapdash tbh.

I'm kind of interested why you think Occam's method would pronounce that the crimp in WTC7 would be anything other than a detonation. It exhibits ALL the hallmarks of a controlled demolition. Plenty of Fred Dibnars have attested to this. Yet you prefer the idea that the central beam fell of it's own accord or due to relatively small damage sustained to one of the base corners of the building? That doesn't sound like Occam's razor to me, at all - so the decision was made to pull.

How do you know Len Robertson and his team never anticipated for the fact airplanes contain fuel - seems pretty obvious to me. Perhaps he was on an 'off day'?

Using the shield *again* of not being a trained scientist against anyone who doesn't have academic laurels in structural engineering can only stretch so far.

In many ways it is like saying one cannot 'get' the meaning of a play because they haven't studied iambic pentameter *shrugs*

eg. though you claim superior right to commentary, you haven't once mentioned the fact that the WTC twin towers were constructed in 3 more or less totally integral sections each. With the HEAVILY reinforced 'sky lobbies' acting as bulwarks for the supported mass above. This doesn't really gel with the entire structure freefalling at the rate of 10 floors a second with no apparent impedance whatsoever.

I further looked to see if the evidence of SQUIBS in any way correlated to the positions of the sky lobbies - and what do you know!? As the buildings are coming down, we only see evidence of what appear to be HUGE squibs at each and every 'sky lobby' level in both buildings.

I'm sure they did fall as Galileo would have expected - at least in the case that all resistance had been removed anyway.

It's a real shame Occam isn't around as it would do excellent to be able to ask of his opinion in regards to whether these buildings were rigged or not.

Did the jet fuel heat the reinforced steel to near it's MP instantaneously? or did it continue to burn for a while at above 1000c, do you think?

The statistical probabilities of not only NORAD running exercises like vigilant shield at exactly the same instance but then further compounded with the fact that the MO in London was almost exactly the same ie mock exercises fitting almost perfectly with the RW events.., are astronomical!!! So many zero's! wow. It's seems to put it out of the grounds on reason to suggest a coincidence imho. The stats on likely incidence for the different events separately are 00000+ etc : 1 also

But mainly on the integral 3 sectioned design which was structured with bearing colossal stresses in mind - and not to free fall in it's own footprint because a slightly bigger airplane than they anticipated had hit it.
04-12-2009, 11:14 PM,
#49
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Oh, I think I get it now. Somehow oxygen depletion brought building 7 down. :rolleyes:
Great topic.
04-13-2009, 04:29 AM,
#50
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Video: Danish Scientist Niels Harrit On Nano-Thermite In WTC Dust

http://www.roguegovernment.com/Video%3A_Da.../0/1/1/Y/M.html
04-13-2009, 01:16 PM,
#51
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Quote:Video: Danish Scientist Niels Harrit On Nano-Thermite In WTC Dust

http://www.roguegovernment.com/Video%3A_Da.../0/1/1/Y/M.html


Thanks for this!:)
04-14-2009, 04:20 AM,
#52
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Instead of focusing on the science behind it, why dont we look at the big picture here? Who did it benefit and why would someone do this? These are the type of questions we should be answering because science is not always rigid in proof, although one would think so.

Or you guys can ignore me and ill :popcorn:
[Image: Palestinian_Dawn_by_Palestinian_Pride.jpg]
04-14-2009, 05:08 AM,
#53
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Good point. Who benefits.
04-14-2009, 06:46 AM,
#54
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Quote:Instead of focusing on the science behind it, why dont we look at the big picture here? Who did it benefit and why would someone do this? These are the type of questions we should be answering because science is not always rigid in proof, although one would think so.

Or you guys can ignore me and ill :popcorn:

nah, it is a good point. The insider trading aspect prior to the attacks is something I was thinking about just yesterday - in terms of if we decide to do the obligatory 911 thread on the first foray onto skeptic boards..

prior and post attack profiteering is definitely something we should focus in on. I agree.
04-15-2009, 10:59 AM,
#55
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
i think this thread has well and truly gone of topic:)
04-16-2009, 02:24 AM,
#56
Is Oxygen depletion more worrying than global warming?
Quote:i think this thread has well and truly gone of topic:)

I agree, l0cked pWned by me..


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  What happened to global warming? --- 18 2,928 02-28-2013, 07:38 PM
Last Post: macfadden
Wink Snow Proves Global Warming ( O RLY!? ) rsol 2 824 10-25-2012, 05:35 PM
Last Post: fireballs
  Astrophysicist Piers Corbyn explains the whole Global Warming aka Climate Change scam icosaface 3 1,954 05-11-2012, 02:17 PM
Last Post: CharliePrime
  Warmlist - A Complete List of Things Caused By Global Warming / Climate Change SerialExpLain 32 6,463 11-16-2011, 06:13 AM
Last Post: icosaface
  Anthropogenic Global Warming - sublimetruth.com - Darius Alexander Darius 38 10,497 11-14-2011, 08:44 PM
Last Post: JazzRoc
  Global Cooling and the NWO - Global Cooling on the Agenda of the Bilderbergs h3rm35 2 1,230 10-16-2010, 01:00 AM
Last Post: JazzRoc
  Scientists call for a global nuclear renaissance in new study nik 1 1,146 08-24-2010, 12:45 AM
Last Post: JazzRoc
Exclamation Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global war joeblow 6 2,316 05-10-2010, 01:44 AM
Last Post: FastTadpole
Thumbs Up 75 Reasons to be Skeptical of "Global Warming" h3rm35 1 1,078 02-24-2010, 08:06 AM
Last Post: FastTadpole
  'Bin Laden' blames US for global warming TriWooOx 2 923 02-03-2010, 03:40 AM
Last Post: Genteel

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)