Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    how can you provide a convincing argument if there is so much doubt in your posts. "another recent theory going round"- wow, now I know you are sure of your ground :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Graham)
    We can provide proof it wasn't 19 extremist muslims.

    No you can't. Or, you would be rich.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.snowshoefilms.com/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.snowshoefilms.com/911coverup.html

    sorry I meant to post this URL
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joeeb)
    http://www.snowshoefilms.com/911coverup.html

    sorry I meant to post this URL
    Errr that was a waste of an hour of my life.

    The supposed 'experts' that keep on speaking continually fail to understand and misrepresent the 'official theories'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ron)
    how can you provide a convincing argument if there is so much doubt in your posts. "another recent theory going round"- wow, now I know you are sure of your ground :rolleyes:
    There we go. Proof of ignorance. :rolleyes:

    What I was saying was a "theory". An idea. Conjecture. Speculation.

    What we are generally discussing in this thread is evidence for the consideration of the "prosecution".

    Sooo, building 7 folks... how did it fall faster than the laws of physics allow?

























    I'll repeat that for the hard of hearing.


    HOW DID BUILDING 7 FALL FASTER THAN THE LAWS OF PHYSICS ALLOW FOR?

    :cool:



    ... just like that.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Well, allah could have been so pleased that he decided to make an appearance :rolleyes:

    why don't you explain for us idiots?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Do explain how it fell faster than the laws of physics! Have you proved einstein wrong?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.911inplanesite.com/
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr Piggy Bank)
    http://www.911inplanesite.com/
    Omg, its almost like that has exactly the same crap as all of the other websites *slaps face*
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rpotter)
    Do explain how it fell faster than the laws of physics! Have you proved einstein wrong?

    Yeah i want to know too!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If I explained how it could fall faster than physics allowed for, then I would have to mention something you lot don't like hearing.... explosives/thermite

    Or can anyone here think of anything else that would help change the equation slightly?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Graham)
    If I explained how it could fall faster than physics allowed for, then I would have to mention something you lot don't like hearing.... explosives/thermite

    Or can anyone here think of anything else that would help change the equation slightly?
    So by using explosives the building will fall faster than it possibly could? ummm right...

    I'll let my EOD mate know that. should provide a laugh in the mess.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Graham)
    If I explained how it could fall faster than physics allowed for, then I would have to mention something you lot don't like hearing.... explosives/thermite

    Or can anyone here think of anything else that would help change the equation slightly?

    Oh Im sorry the laws of physics dont apply to explosives! WTF are you on?!!

    P.S. whatever it is can I have some :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rpotter)
    Oh Im sorry the laws of physics dont apply to explosives! WTF are you on?!!

    P.S. whatever it is can I have some :p:
    I don't wanna speak for graham but I'm sure he means 'faster than the laws of physics allow for a gravity collapse.'
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rusty33)



    http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/p...ct=911_project


    keep in mind that there simply was a breakdown in security for these hijackers. I'm not saying that anything was done by the book on this day.
    Cheers Rusty good link.

    However there is a debate to be had over the reasons that SOPs weren't followed. Like why did it take the FAA 16 minutes to pick up the phone to advise NORAAD that a plane had been hijacked.

    So far the administration have given thee different explanations.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Is that "thee" in the classical sense? How twee
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Carl)
    Is that "thee" in the classical sense? How twee
    Ha ha.
    No it's not. It's my rubbish typing / keyboard. Should be three.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rpotter)
    Oh Im sorry the laws of physics dont apply to explosives! WTF are you on?!!

    P.S. whatever it is can I have some :p:
    no... you seem to have missed the point. I'll try again.

    It is impossible for Building 7 to fall that fast, unless some extra energy appeared from somewhere to help it along.

    So.. lets make a list. Explosives... err... hand of god? ^o)
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Graham)
    It is impossible for Building 7 to fall that fast, unless some extra energy appeared from somewhere to help it along.

    So.. lets make a list. Explosives... err... hand of god? ^o)
    No, that would imply that the building's downward motion was given more energy than just graviational collapse. An explosive would remove the supports within the building thus allowing the building to collapse graviationally. So unless you're using explosives which pushed the top of the building downwards, which is not what you're talking about, you're whole 'Faster than the laws of physics' is mute.

    What you're attempting to say is "How come the building collapsed so fast that it appeared to have been in freefall, with no internal support?" That would imply something (ie the explosives you're talking about) removing internal supports. You're just throwing in 'it's breaking the laws of physics' to sensationalise it, despite it being complete crap, and does nothing more than make you look like you don't understand what you seem to be shouting from the roof tops.

    A tip for trying to convince people of your point of view, try forming coherent thoughts before typing them
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.