Chomsky says 9/11 truthers are nutters

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 161 - 180 of total 269 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Dec 3, 2013 - 01:40pm PT
OK Monolith, let's call it demolition collapse rate speeds.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 3, 2013 - 01:41pm PT
No, lets knott.
survival

Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
Dec 3, 2013 - 01:46pm PT
Conspiracy debunked.

Early advocates such as physicist Steven E. Jones, architect Richard Gage, software engineer Jim Hoffman, and theologian David Ray Griffin, argued that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings would not have collapsed completely, nor at the speeds that they did, without additional energy involved to weaken their structures.[citation needed]

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the magazine Popular Mechanics examined and rejected these theories. Specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering accept the model of a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, an explanation that does not involve the use of explosives.


Did anyone notice this dudes qualifications?????!!!!!
theologian David Ray Griffin
BWA HA HA hahahahahahahaaa!!!! No wonder some believe him....
God said the Jews did it. Wait, the Jews are God's special children.
Which is it?
WBraun

climber
Dec 3, 2013 - 01:48pm PT
You're years behind survival.

Your internet research skills are below kindergarten ......
survival

Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
Dec 3, 2013 - 01:50pm PT
Yeah right Werner.

And the invisible proof is only visible to special enlightened creatures, like you and Ron and Blue.
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Dec 3, 2013 - 01:50pm PT
Griffen is just the messenger.
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Dec 3, 2013 - 01:51pm PT
Almost 50 years ago the Chicago Convention Center was hosting a home show.
Somebody left a lamp on that shorted out and set some furnishings on fire.
The 'totally fireproof' steel and concrete building eventually got hot
enough from just the fuel of some home furnishings, many of which were
considered 'fireproof', that the steel buckled and collapsed. No jet fuel,
or explosives, was needed.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 3, 2013 - 01:56pm PT
"Conspiracy debunked."


It'll never happen. Nutters will always be nutters.
WBraun

climber
Dec 3, 2013 - 02:06pm PT
apogee -- "Nutters will always be nutters."


Then why do you always remain as a nutcase .......
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Dec 3, 2013 - 02:17pm PT
NIST admitted that their report on WTC-7 is not consistent with basic principles of physics.

Those who still fall for the NIST explanation for WTC 7’s collapse are the ones who abandoned science and gave in to fantasy on the subject of 9/11.

Notice Werner's MO at work again here. Another completely bullshit statement with absolutely nothing to substantiate it.

Curt
survival

Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
Dec 3, 2013 - 02:20pm PT
It's very easy to say "I found the truth. Now you go find it."

Easy to say, but you don't share the proof?

That's because there isn't any.
WBraun

climber
Dec 3, 2013 - 02:23pm PT
No that's because you guys are pure fuking bullsh!ters and lazy azz ......
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Dec 3, 2013 - 02:26pm PT
It's very easy to say "I found the truth. Now you go find it."

Easy to say, but you don't share the proof?

That's because there isn't any.

More likely his "source" is an acknowledged tin-foil-hat website.

Curt
survival

Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
Dec 3, 2013 - 02:29pm PT
pure fuking bullsh!ters


Uh huh.

Who's bullshitting who?

No Proof.

No Proof.

No Proof.

No Proof.

No Proof.

No Proof.

No Proof.

No Proof.

No Proof.

No Proof.

No Proof.
WBraun

climber
Dec 3, 2013 - 02:30pm PT
Exactly

You don't have any proof .....
raymond phule

climber
Dec 3, 2013 - 02:32pm PT

god forbid the laws of physics be held to

I guess it is about who's laws of physics that should be used in the analysis...
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Dec 3, 2013 - 02:50pm PT
David Ray Griffen, the theologian that Survival is laughing at, likes to point out conflicts of interest like what is quoted below.

"Why Popular Mechanics Cannot be Trusted"
Submitted by mdefarge on Sun, 12/09/2012 - 20:07. Permalink
http://911truthaustralia.com/pm.html

Login or register to post comments
Vote up! +4 Vote down!
Michael Chertoff's cousin?! Holy Crap!
Submitted by Jiminy Cricket on Sun, 12/09/2012 - 21:09. Permalink
".. Benjamin Chertoff, who described himself as the "senior researcher" for PM's 911 Debunking article, is a cousin of the new head of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff


https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/01/01-2
crankster

Trad climber
South Lake Tahoe, CA
Dec 3, 2013 - 04:41pm PT
Can't debate the nutters. They seek acceptance of their looney theory and we are accomplice's by giving them a forum. Left to themselves, who can they harm? As long as they are in their bunkers exchanging secret messages and hand shakes, it's really not a problem.

I'd be in favor of having some sort of voluntary de-programming camp that their relatives can send them to. Truther's are cult members, it's important to sever their ties with the source of their disinformation, so the internet would not be allowed. They would be shown scientific explanations of the building collapse - the truth - that fire and physics took the buildings down.

Over time, the sane one would see how preposterous it is to claim that a large team of explosive experts (all still silent about their nefarious activity) took down the buildings simultaneously with an al Qaeda attack. (Or wait, was that part of it, too?, I get confused about the totality of the conspiracy nonsense).

Until then, it's important to call them what they are: Nuts.

apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 3, 2013 - 04:57pm PT
"Can't debate the nutters."


Or the Religi-nutz.

Or the Republicans.

See the pattern?
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Dec 3, 2013 - 05:57pm PT
Calling others nutters is a normal and classical psychological projection and reaction, but you guys can't see yourselves for your own bad breath.

I find it very interesting and don't lock on to anyone's particular theory or conspiracy.

Right on!
Messages 161 - 180 of total 269 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta