phew first posted topic please be gentle

Moderator: Moderators
why are so many adults so resistant
Wow, he's pretty observant...he got it right first time when he said they turned to dust.he looked at me puzzeled and said 'mummy how did that building turn to dust?'
Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.Andrew. wrote:.
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Marigold wrote:Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.Andrew. wrote:.
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Steel in convenient lengths shipped away according to whom, CNN & AE911? And oh, is there a difference between them?![]()
Steel was dustified, so very little to ship out if any.
Again no argument here, just that the only serious attempt at discussing evidence is again by Dr Judy Wood at www.drjudywood.com
Have a nice day!
Or just mislead altogether!!scienceplease 2 wrote:If you go to RadioLab episode on memory you can see how easy it is to implant false memories and false beliefs?
Gzoinks!Marigold wrote:Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.Andrew. wrote:.
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Steel in convenient lengths shipped away according to whom, CNN & AE911? And oh, is there a difference between them?![]()
Steel was dustified, so very little to ship out if any.
I agree that the picture you have given shows a pile of steel/rubble, but in respect to the proportion of steel which made-up the complete building before 9/11 is comparatively small. Below the picture is the answer to your claim that steel was shipped out:Andrew. wrote:Marigold wrote:Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.Andrew. wrote:.
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Steel in convenient lengths shipped away according to whom, CNN & AE911? And oh, is there a difference between them?![]()
Steel was dustified, so very little to ship out if any.
Again no argument here, just that the only serious attempt at discussing evidence is again by Dr Judy Wood at www.drjudywood.com
Have a nice day!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... rials.html
Extraordinary pictures of 9/11 relics revealed as they are shipped across world for tenth anniversary memorials
--------------
But this is pointless! The Steel Was Quickly Shipped Away!
It seems that various unsubstantiated statements have been made over time to explain the extreme level of absence of debris. One such statement is “The steel was all sold to China and shipped away promptly,
A “Lengthy” Discussion of The Steel in the Debris of the WTC
94
before it could be examined.” However, we have no evidence that such a large-scale operation was undertaken or completed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. Did anyone report many fleets of trucks, filled with steel girders, driving down the streets of Manhattan to the Docks. and their loads being transferred onto large container vessels? There are no pictures or video of this supposed operation that are readily available, nor have the details of such a major clean-up exercise ever been discussed.
Can We “Count” The Debris?
In Part 1 of “The Overwhelming Implausibility of Using Directed Energy Beams to Demolish the World Trade Center Towers” 63, published online in the Journal of 9/11 Studies64, Dr. Jenkins states:
Some proponents of the „missing debris‟ hypothesis prefer to “count” the debris from photographs. This is an inherently reckless approach to the problem. Photographs offer no way to directly view all the individual steel beams in debris piles or debris occupying sublevel collapses. For instance, any attempt to “count” the beams or “wall sections” in the debris pile of WTC 7 will fall short of accounting for the total mass of the building for the simple reason that the debris is located in a pile and all photographs only show the surface. That does not mean that the rubble pile does not contain the mass of the building. Even if the debris were spread out somewhat, the same problem applies when attempting to “count” the debris.
In this article, I hope to show that, because of the sheer scale of the WTC buildings, there is considerable value in attempting to calculate other figures which illustrate the very large volume of material which should have been visible in the immediate aftermath of the WTC Towers destruction.
Calculating Approximate Total Length of Steel
Vertical Columns
The towers were 415 metres above ground, though some steel pieces would have been below ground level. There were 236 exterior (perimeter) columns and 47 interior (core) steel columns in each building. Total Length of Vertical Steel = 566 x 415 = 234890m
You're argument is devoid of science contrary to your name. Again you have no evidence, you're just whitewashing evidence. Whose side are you on Scienceplease2?scienceplease 2 wrote:Gzoinks!Marigold wrote:Trolling Disinfo again Andrew, tut, tut.Andrew. wrote:.
And people noticed how most of the steel was in convenient lengths, for it to be transported away. Controlled demolition.
Steel in convenient lengths shipped away according to whom, CNN & AE911? And oh, is there a difference between them?![]()
Steel was dustified, so very little to ship out if any.![]()
There's no such process as "dustification". You might as well say "it was magic"!
There are no DEW capable of doing the damage and even there was it would be unproven and therefore would not be given any green light by risk-adverse insiders.
There is no "magic" energy and Telsa did not invent the ray gun.
Bizarro!
I'm obviously on the side of Truth...Marigold wrote:
You're argument is devoid of science contrary to your name. Again you have no evidence, you're just whitewashing evidence. Whose side are you on Scienceplease2?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 93GPK1.DTL
War From Space
Hi Funky,funkywitch1982 wrote:i was watching the other day a brilliant documentary called The Elephant in the room when my 6 yr old jumped on the sofa next 2 me just as a shot of the first tower falling appeared he looked at me puzzeled and said 'mummy how did that building turn to dust?' i told him the offical story and then told him what i had learned through Blueprint for truth and other documentaries he just looked at me and said 'looks like bombs to me' then promptly ran off to play, it got me thinking if my young 'un can spot somethings not right why are so many adults so resistant
phew first posted topic please be gentle
Heck, I wish all mothers were as encouraging with their children as thisfunkywitch1982 wrote:Marigold
i know he is cute he also asked about the Pentagon when he came back in 'what had happened' i told him the offical story again about a plane flying into it, he looked puzzeled again and asked where the wings were and the engines, i just smiled and said 'thats the question lad'
he's such a clever lad