EminemBase

[EminemBase]

Yeah, WTC 7 was usually the smoking gun, and what puzzles me the most, still leaving me with the thought of an inside job.

My point earlier about it being a lot harder to disprove these "facts" than it is to spread them could apply though.

It's always "the fires could not have made the building fall symmetrically" often said as a blanket statement without any real evidence backing it up. I suppose if it had been peer reviewed and it was certainly impossible for the building to fall like that, then yes, it would have probably been an inside job.

But I think the burden of proof perhaps should be on showing that it can't occur naturally. Imagine setting fire to a tree and watching it burn and persuasively stating that it's impossible for that to happen naturally. You have to then justify how it's impossible to the nth degree - not just "it's never happened before".

Well, look in to the science; many have proven that it cannot occur naturally. Not only that, but no steel structure in history has ever collapsed from fire damage let alone demolished itself in 7 seconds: honestly man, look at Building 7, it wasn't hit by a plane! it had minimal fire damage yet out of nowhere floors start blowing out and it goes down like a house of cards in 7 seconds :/ you don't need a peer-reviewed paper to tell you that's just not plausible lmao.

Not to mention the traces of nano-thermate found all over the place, which by the way, there has been a peer-reviewed paper on that. There has been no explanation for the traces of nano (some un-detinated) thermate in the debri / dust of the buildings (all three)... I mean, how do you explain that? nano-thermate is an explosive, the kind of high-tech explosive that you would expect if these buildings were demolished. No explanation has been given.

I mean... I don't get in to who did it and why, I have my personal beliefs but, due to the nature of media characterizing anybody who even QUESTIONS any official story put out ever as a 'nutty conspiracy theorist', I keep my distance from things I can't prove...

But, just in terms of physics man... a symmetrical free-fall collapse? that just can't happen naturally. Not only did it happen on 9/11, but it happened three times.

Fire can't cause a building to fall symmetrically because fire damage is not consistent. For a building to fall in symmetry, all floors / structures need to fail at once, at the same time... that's the reason it takes skilled professionals to do that, because it's not an easy thing to pull off. And even beyond the symmetry - a building falling free-fall? free-fall means NOTHING underneath it aka no resistance: there's simply been no explanation as to how that occurred, and there never will be. Because free-fall collapses can only happen if nothing is resisting the collapsing structure...

Honestly man, just going by basic physics - the official theory, is not possible.

[Sam.]

I'm forever grateful to you for that. Lmao!

As per the topic at hand, many people who were on the streets witnessing the whole thing, say "We heard an explosion!". Several video footage suggests that there was an incidence of windows shattering preceded by a loud sound and then, it collapsed.

We all know that there was fire in the building, chances are that the fire trespassed through the ventilators or AC mains and might have affected the compressors located in each floors, causing the explosion within and damaging the internal infrastructure causing the collapse.

That's a theory. Don't if it made sense.

[Kill You]

I'm now 23. I've grown up on his music completely and obsessively.

1989 Master race?

Yes, we are the master race.

[EminemBase]

I'm forever grateful to you for that. Lmao!

As per the topic at hand, many people who were on the streets witnessing the whole thing, say "We heard an explosion!". Several video footage suggests that there was an incidence of windows shattering preceded by a loud sound and then, it collapsed.

We all know that there was fire in the building, chances are that the fire trespassed through the ventilators or AC mains and might have affected the compressors located in each floors, causing the explosion within and damaging the internal infrastructure causing the collapse.

That's a theory. Don't if it made sense.

That doesn't explain how the buildings fell symmetrically though, and at free-fall speed, or why there were traces of explosives (nano-thermate / used by the military) in the dust all around New York.

[Sam.]

Oh..

[CrashBand]

I just feel it's precariously close to an intelligent design argument.

>We don't know how something would happen naturally.
>It looks like other controlled demolitions (things that are designed).
>Therefore it is controlled demolition.

I remember the thermite as well. Again it is going to be hard for anyone to disprove that thermite was in the debris once the thing has been spread. I'm only going off authoritarian conspiracy sights that there were.

If it's an undeniable fact though....it certainly makes you wonder.

I also think you have to be wary of discarding questions about motive as being a purely emotional ones. Yes, ignore the people that say "America just wouldn't kill thousands of people....no one would do that". But questions about motive and how they would keep it under raps are definitely ones to mull over.

[viJilance]

I remember when I heard about 9/11 the day it happened.

I didn't think much of it when they announced it at school, being a public school in the suburbs in all the sort of Shielded our eyes from what happened.Then when I got home, I saw fucking planes crashing into buildings. I thought to myself: "How can this happen? Who would even do this? There are people like that in the world?" I had so many questions.

And now I make jokes about shooting up old folks' homes, and actually find it kinda funny. T-T-Thanks 9/11

[Shade135]

EminemBase, do you still think that 9/11 was an inside job?

Or have you grown out of that?

I believe 100% it was. EmBase said everything I think about it already. What people need to learn is that the Government is not our friend. I don't watch the New's because it is all governed, but people watch it anyway and are brainwashed into thinking that whatever the broadcast is, is the way it is. They don't think outside of the box EVER, it drive's me fucking crazy to think that people think the goverment is here to help. FACTS point at it being an inside job, like EmBase said, they were controlled demolition's. If you watch the actual slowed down video of it all, you can clearly see the planes hit just second's after the first bomb goes off, you can see the explotion before any contact with the plane. They didn't give a shit how many people died or it wouldn't have happened. As long as you brainwash people enough, you can make them believe anything want you them to, you can do anything. Nobody talk's about building 7, it collapsed the same fucking time, but nobody talk's about it because no plane's where there, the attention was on the other 2.

I will also take this moment to address Bin Laden, the one supposedly behind it all, the "Most wanted man in the world". BULLSHIT. you're going to tell me that out of the 8 BILLION people in this world, nobody can find 1 fucking person for a $10 million reward. I'm on team Obama, but it was extremely convienient to wait till he got into office before killing Osama so now everyone that was septical of Obama as president, because there was alot, all now jumped on board from this "amazing find and kill". That's the part the new's doesnt tell you. It's also funny that they dumbed his body in the ocean, no fucking proof it was even him. Don't you think that if someone were to actually complete this amazing accomplishment they would have proudly displayed his body in a museum or even the White House. It's all bullshit, it's all government.

I may be wrong and created my own thoeries from the fact's I know and have learned over the period of time, but that is my very strong opinion of the matter.

[EminemBase]

I just feel it's precariously close to an intelligent design argument.

>We don't know how something would happen naturally.
>It looks like other controlled demolitions (things that are designed).
>Therefore it is controlled demolition.

I remember the thermite as well. Again it is going to be hard for anyone to disprove that thermite was in the debris once the thing has been spread. I'm only going off authoritarian conspiracy sights that there were.

If it's an undeniable fact though....it certainly makes you wonder.

I also think you have to be wary of discarding questions about motive as being a purely emotional ones. Yes, ignore the people that say "America just wouldn't kill thousands of people....no one would do that". But questions about motive and how they would keep it under raps are definitely ones to mull over.

Well it's not like an intelligent design argument...

It's not just "it couldn't happen naturally / looks like a controlled demolition / therefore is"

It's: there is zero explanation as to how this can occur naturally, not only that but a natural occurrence in this instance would defy basic laws of physics. Then, what does it look like? a controlled demolition, okay - is there evidence to support this theory? yes, heaps... therefore this is the most plausible explanation.

That's a lot different from "I don't like / understand how life evolved and we don't have a full explanation for origin yet... therefore god did it. Is there any evidence god did it? no, I just like that idea so Ima go with it".

A controlled demolition is neither impossible nor ridiculous, and everything points toward it being that; and certain characteristics are not explainable in any other way.

If someone was murdered, and the official story is that they were stabbed to death... and yet on the autopsy they find no stab wounds; just one wound - a gunshot wound to the head... personally, I would choose to believe that person got shot in the head. As I base my beliefs on common sense and the facts in front of me rather than peer, media or government pressure.

The government theory is the ridiculous one. There's only one wound, and it's a gunshot, and there's a video of the shot going to the head, and we have traces of gunpowder all over the place.

[CrashBand]

I was going to use a murder scene as an example for my first point. It is far easier to make up and spread a "fact" such as "there was no blood found at the crime", then it is to disprove it. And if you do disprove it, conspiracy theorists group that as part of the conspiracy.

Basically, there a going to be anomalies for any event when you are looking at it after the event. And then conspiracy theorists put a gratuitous burden on people to explain it these anomalies.

All I'm saying is, I agree that we shouldn't just believe the government's story on authority, but we also shouldn't just believe "actual facts"--such as thermite--on authority too.

[EminemBase]

I was going to use a murder scene as an example for my first point. It is far easier to make up and spread a "fact" such as "there was no blood found at the crime", then it is to disprove it. And if you do disprove it, conspiracy theorists group that as part of the conspiracy.

Basically, there a going to be anomalies for any event when you are looking at it after the event. And then conspiracy theorists put a gratuitous burden on people to explain it these anomalies.

All I'm saying is, I agree that we shouldn't just believe the government's story on authority, but we also shouldn't just believe "actual facts"--such as thermite--on authority too.

But I haven't done that and I'm not taking people's words for it.

You have no idea the depth that I've looked in to it... I've heard everything from the 9/11 Commission and NIST; there has been no explanation, and proof of corruption: one of the prior heads of the 9/11 Commission stepped down mid investigation as he said it had been set-up to fail.

The controlled demolition theory has not been disproved... only proven, again, and again in multiple ways, and I've heard arguments from both sides. I don't just decide to believe something, hear a few ideas and stick with it. That's not the kind of person I am. I studied this for years on end, looking intensely at both sides, all arguments, all facts, all possibilities...

These FACTS (yes, they are facts, no need to add inverted comma's lol) SUCH AS: the buildings falling symmetrically and at free-fall speed... these are not disputed, even by the government bodies appointed to investigate it... nobody disputes these facts, and there's dozens of 9/11 videos from that day as we've all seen which clearly show us the buildings falling and the nature of those collapses. They begrudgingly admitted free-fall and failed to explain how it could have happened naturally.... so, these aren't ideas or theories being peddled by people on the Internet: this is the reality that you and anybody who wants to determine the truth of the event, have to address.

The official theories (yes, they've (NIST) come up with a few to try and explain these miraculous collapses) given are not scientifically sound or possible. They've failed to account for free-fall, the symmetry or even how the buildings collapsed to begin with. The buildings were damaged asymmetrically and randomly, and after the planes burned up, there was nothing but fire to weaken the steel... nothing was damaging the internal structures... they were stood standing... so what do you propose all of a sudden make them rip themselves to the ground at warp speed? They didn't just collapse, watch the videos: they perfectly imploded like a house of cards whilst EJECTING building material horizontally. A gravitational collapse can not account for that.

The controlled demolition theory is plausible and likely because there is mountains of evidence to support it, even if you try and say the traces of explosive found in the dust all around New York was invented or faked (by respected independent scientists with no agenda... sure...), even if you ignore that: the very fact those buildings fell at all and then specifically how they did, that's all the evidence you need and go learn something from some architectural experts and demolition experts, many of whom, who don't have conflict of interests, work for or alongside the government etc. have declared those collapses: controlled demolitions. I don't go by hunches, I go by information.

[SoldierShady]

The sheer dick-riding-ness this topic exudes is quite astounding. EmBase writes very detailed posts, yes. But how does that make them all "spot on" and "100% true"? Lol.

[PAINKILLƎR]

Gtfo

[SoldierShady]

Gtfo

See what I mean?

[SliK]

Now tell me why the moon landing didn't happen.