9/11 conspiracy debunking videos


Toro
#1
One hour.

Worth the time.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=1

 
gopher
+1
#2  Top Rated Post
I'll check the video later on.

But, off hand, does it explain how Tower # 7 fell without being touched?
 
lone wolf
#3
It IS worth the look. Thanks....

Wolf
 
eh1eh
#4
Toro is on the cutting edge.
 
Toro
#5
Yeah, cutting edge of years old C&P
 
DaSleeper
#6
Saw a similar show on Bell expressvu the other night......

This one is just as interesting.....now that I have it saved to my hard drive...i hope the resolution is good enough when I convert it to Divx to play on my DVD player
 
EagleSmack
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by gopherView Post

I'll check the video later on.

But, off hand, does it explain how Tower # 7 fell without being touched?

Gopher, over and over you have been directed to pictures, videos, and quotes of eyewitnesses saying that the backside of WTC 7 was destroyed. There are videos of the North Tower clearly hitting WTC 7. There is a quote... an on scene quote of a NYFD firefighter saying that the building is already unstable because of damage and that is why they cannot go in to fight the fires because it is going to collapse.

But still you say it was not touched.

Why?
 
I think not
#8
WTC did not collapse at Free Fall Speed.


httpwwwyoutubecomwatchvqLShZOvxVe4

Last edited by I think not; Sep 10th, 2007 at 10:03 AM..
 
karrie
#9
Just a note to all participants in the current 9/11 and WTC threads, to please keep the forum rules in mind. Multiple threads on the same topic are discouraged. Please don't create any new ones outside of the preexisting ones. These ones are too long now to merge without great confusion, but new ones will be subject to merging or deletion.
 
karrie
#10
A good vid ITN... I need to stay out of these darn 9/11 threads, or my eyes will be red and puffy all freaking day.
 
DaSleeper
#11
AH Shucks Karrie.......we need several new threads.......If only to totaly confuse the theorists
 
karrie
#12
lol. Sorry DaS.

I'm such a hardnose when it comes to tidying the place up. lol.
 
DaSleeper
#13
You gotta admit though that they provide comic relief after all the p-----political dicussions....... hee hee!
 
karrie
#14
lol. if that's the way you see it DaS.
 
DurkaDurka
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

lol. Sorry DaS.

I'm such a hardnose when it comes to tidying the place up. lol.

I could use some Mr.Clean, at a minimum.
 
Logic 7
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by gopherView Post

I'll check the video later on.

But, off hand, does it explain how Tower # 7 fell without being touched?


They don't explain why, all they say,

"i understand why people might think that, and i see what they are saying, but when you learned the fact about the way building 7 was built, and about the way it supported itself, and the damage that was done by the collapsing towers, the idea that it was a controlled demolition just holds no water."


This is one of the most pathetic answer i ever heard in my entire life.



Then the narration goes,with the video, showing wtc 1 collapsing """ as the twin towers collapse, debris smashed into wtc7""

However you clearly see no debris at all going to the wtc 7 from the collapse.

The final report on wtc7 , is still being prepared as they say, 5 years of investigation to prove that wtc 7 collapsed ,not demolished.


And no word at all , on Sylverstein, not even a single one.
 
EagleSmack
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by Logic 7View Post

They don't explain why, all they say,

"i understand why people might think that, and i see what they are saying, but when you learned the fact about the way building 7 was built, and about the way it supported itself, and the damage that was done by the collapsing towers, the idea that it was a controlled demolition just holds no water."


This is one of the most pathetic answer i ever heard in my entire life.



Then the narration goes,with the video, showing wtc 1 collapsing """ as the twin towers collapse, debris smashed into wtc7""

However you clearly see no debris at all going to the wtc 7 from the collapse.

The final report on wtc7 , is still being prepared as they say, 5 years of investigation to prove that wtc 7 collapsed ,not demolished.


And no word at all , on Sylverstein, not even a single one.

Well everyone else has seen it... but you never will. You just won't. Because if you do open your eyes and see what everyone else sees... the North Tower smashing into WTC 7... well then you can no longer believe what you want to believe.
 
DurkaDurka
#18
Eagle, I don't see why you even bother replying to Logic's posts anymore. He/She is a lost cause unwilling to listen to anything other then his/hers own skewed view of things.
 
Logic 7
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by I think notView Post

WTC did not collapse at Free Fall Speed.


httpwwwyoutubecomwatchvqLShZOvxVe4



Controlled demolition doesnt make building falling exactly at free fall speed, it is always very near.Taking into account that both wtc had 110 floor, 15 sec to 20 sec for a controlled demolition just make sense.


The US official explanation, it is a pancake collapse,which would have taken at the least 45 sec, considering there is resistance beetween each floor.
 
karrie
#20
Conspiracy theories are like Whack-a-Mole. Hit one, and another one's waiting to pop up regardless. And more likely that not, it will be even closer to the truth of it, so that it's harder and harder to disprove.

Good luck as these moles speed up boys.

Good luck.
 
wallyj
#21
What comes to mind when dealing with the theorists is the sign on the old folks home on the "simpsons", Please do not talk about the outside world.
 
hermanntrude
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by illogical 7View Post

The US official explanation, it is a pancake collapse,which would have taken at the least 45 sec, considering there is resistance beetween each floor.

interesting figure. Who made it up?
 
I think not
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by Logic 7View Post

Controlled demolition doesnt make building falling exactly at free fall speed, it is always very near.Taking into account that both wtc had 110 floor, 15 sec to 20 sec for a controlled demolition just make sense.


The US official explanation, it is a pancake collapse,which would have taken at the least 45 sec, considering there is resistance beetween each floor.

I got news for you, did you watch the video? If you did, you will notice the DEBRIS FALLING AT FREE FALL SPEED, while the building came tumbling after it.

And BTW, where the heck do you come up with 45 sec? YOu make things up as you go along.

See help, I'm serious.
 
EagleSmack
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by I think notView Post

I got news for you, did you watch the video? If you did, you will notice the DEBRIS FALLING AT FREE FALL SPEED, while the building came tumbling after it.

And BTW, where the heck do you come up with 45 sec? YOu make things up as you go along.

See help, I'm serious.

He has no choice. He has to make things up as he goes along.
 
EagleSmack
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrudeView Post

interesting figure. Who made it up?

Who do you think made it up?
 
hermanntrude
#26
i'm sure it's the result of long, careful and in-depth calculations, based on empirical physics.
 
cortex
#27
Have you ever seen 2001 a space odyssey?---according to that documentary there is a giant fetus orbiting the earth. This fetus used to be a Canadian astronaut. He killed a computer, dropped some acid and dove in a worm hole. He did this all without the use of the Canadian space arm. To make a long story short, 911 never happened because the twin towers never existed. I visited new york city in 1997 and noted the remarkable absence of any twin towers. ---My journal from that day is very clear " Towers a lie -twins even more so" --What more evidence does one need?--or do I have to show you that giant fetus myself?
 
hermanntrude
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by cortexView Post

Have you ever seen 2001 a space odyssey?---according to that documentary there is a giant fetus orbiting the earth. This fetus used to be a Canadian astronaut. He killed a computer, dropped some acid and dove in a worm hole. He did this all without the use of the Canadian space arm. To make a long story short, 911 never happened because the twin towers never existed. I visited new york city in 1997 and noted the remarkable absence of any twin towers. ---My journal from that day is very clear " Towers a lie -twins even more so" --What more evidence does one need?--or do I have to show you that giant fetus myself?

what the hell???

that's a science fiction movie, not a documentary.

Acid was not involved in the movie, and neither was 9/11 or the twin towers.

Possibly you're being sarcastic?
 
cortex
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrudeView Post

what the hell???

that's a science fiction movie, not a documentary.

Acid was not involved in the movie, and neither was 9/11 or the twin towers.

Possibly you're being sarcastic?

Carefull ---dont anger the giant fetus--He has some mean monkey friends.

But seriously -the monoliths in 2001 foreshadow the twin towers- the overseerers have allowed them to be symbolically destroyed to warn us of the impending visitation of the giant fetus.
 
hermanntrude
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by cortexView Post

Carefull ---dont anger the giant fetus--He has some mean monkey friends.

But seriously -the monoliths in 2001 foreshadow the twin towers- the overseerers have allowed them to be symbolically destroyed to warn us of the impending visitation of the giant fetus.

OK, you're either being sarcastic or dangerously insane.

I'll plump for the former, which is funnier and much less worrying
 

Similar Threads

5
Videos
by darkbeaver | Sep 30th, 2008
0
videos debunking creationism
by ShintoMale | May 12th, 2008
356
9/11: Debunking The Myths
by I think not | Jun 12th, 2006
2
Debunking 911 Conspiracy Theories
by Vanni Fucci | Dec 29th, 2004
no new posts