Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 4 votes

911 inside job - for what?


  • Please log in to reply
4446 replies to this topic

#2881    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:36 PM

View PostStundie, on 09 September 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

Proving that you do not actually READ the posts you spambot!! lol

Goes to show that you cannot even admit that I beat you to the punch!

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2882    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:36 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

Good, case closed, because I have already pointed that fact out to you!!
Case not closed at all seeing as it highlights that you clearly have the reading comprehension skills of a chimpanzee and logical skills of a baseball bat.

If your argument is that none of these building had a plane hit it, then neither did WTC 7. So therefore your argument has been trounced and shown for the stupidity it is.
  • Meridian Plaza = No plane & didn't collapse
  • First Interstate Bank = No plane & didn't collapse
  • New York Plaza = No plane & didn't collapse
  • Caracas Towers = No plane & didn't collapse
  • Beijing Mandarin Hotel = No plane & didn't collapse
  • WTC 7 = No plane & collapsed

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

On the contrary, it was brought to you that WTC7 suffered massive damage on the south side and in fact,  why don't you tell us just how huge the hole was on the south side of WTC7.
On the contrary, it has been shown to you time and time again that the WTC 5 suffered much larger damage and fires in comparison to the size of the buildings than WTC7 as it was much closer to the WTC1 & 2 and therefore, suffered much more debris crashing on it than WTC 7, yet it still stood.
  • WTC 7 = No plane, debris damage, fires = collapse!
  • WTC 5 = No plane, bigger debris damage, bigger fires = No collapse!
Shall I wait for the argument that WTC 5 & 7 were designed differently, even though the WTC 1, 2 & 7 were designed differently to the Windsor Building and a toy factory in Thailand, therefore completing your illogical and retarded loop?? lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

Don't forget to mention that WTC7 buckled just before it collapse, which was an indication that fire had weakened its structure. Here's a link to  help you out.

http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm

Sorry but if ironworkers are incapable of detecting molten steel without the aid of a metallurgist, then those who witnessed the buckling at WTC7 are also incapable of detecting the buckling without the aid of a structural engineer!

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

Now, it has been 12 years since the 911 attack, so where is YOUR evidence that fires were not responsible for the collapse of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7? I am WAITING!! :yes:
If you honestly believed there was no evidence after 12 years, then you wouldn't be spending your time arguing otherwise. :rolleyes: lol

If you were that convinced and sure in your story, you would be doing something much more important and beneficial in your life than imitating a spambot! lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#2883    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:38 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

I asked you for evidence that proved me wrong and you came up empty-handed again!! :w00t:
I do not doubt that you might know people in the Pentagon.

However, knowing people in the pentagon doesn't make your story any more credible does it?? lol

Considering that you are a internet debunking spam warrior! lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#2884    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:41 PM

View PostStundie, on 09 September 2013 - 12:36 PM, said:

Case not closed at all seeing as it highlights that you clearly have the reading comprehension skills of a chimpanzee and logical skills of a baseball bat.

Let's see! I asked you for evidence and you failed, so that is strike one.

I asked you for evidence again, and you failed to provide the evidence, so that's strike two.

I asked you a again for evidence, and you failed once again, so that's strike three, which means you are out!!

Edited by skyeagle409, 09 September 2013 - 12:41 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2885    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:43 PM

View PostStundie, on 09 September 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

I do not doubt that you might know people in the Pentagon.

However, knowing people in the pentagon doesn't make your story any more credible does it??

On the contrary, and unfortunately for  you,  it does. Now, where is your evidence that proves me wrong?

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2886    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:44 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:25 PM, said:

The real comedy lies in the fact that your frailed attempt to refute my claims with your so-called evidence has failed! :yes:
Seeing as you clearly can't read and fall in to predictable behaviour even when it is clearly pointed out to you, then how can I present evidence when you obviously struggle to comprehend clearly written text before your very eyes...lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

Now, where is the real evidence?!
Seeing as you have no grasp on reality, real evidence doesn't exist only your imagined evidence is real...lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

A simulator is a bit more difficult than the real thing.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Are you fricking serious?? lol

In a desperate attempt at making a point, you think that a simulation is more difficult than the real thing!!

I suppose my F1 career should start any moment because driving a F1 car is much more easier than a simulation.

See how you will even say the most moronic things, in order to fool yourself into thinking you have a point!!

Too funny!! Simulations are more difficult than the real thing! hahahahahahahahahaha!!

Edited by Stundie, 09 September 2013 - 12:57 PM.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#2887    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:49 PM

View PostStundie, on 09 September 2013 - 12:44 PM, said:

I suppose my F1 career should start any moment because driving a F1 car is much more easier than a simulation.

A car is not an airplane nor can a comparison be made with airline simulators and your F1 car simulator, which any pilot wili tell you. Since you failed to provide the evidence that  I asked for, we now find ourselves in a new inning, so for you, that means, strike one

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2888    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:51 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:

Let's see! I asked you for evidence and you failed, so that is strike one.

I asked you for evidence again, and you failed to provide the evidence, so that's strike two.

I asked you a again for evidence, and you failed once again, so that's strike three, which means you are out!!
You use the worst comparators for the WTC collapse like the Windsor Building, a 3rd world toy factory and an overpass as REAL evidence to support your theory, even though the closer comparators like all the other buildings which are high rise steel structures are NOT REAL evidence because they don't support your theory.  Strike One!
You then proceed to tell us that none of the closer comparators were not hit by a plane, even though the WTC7 wasn't either. Strike Two!
You then tell us that none of the closer comparators suffered debris damage, even though WTC 5 suffered more damage and fires than WTC7! Strike Three!

Your out of here son!! Early bath for you sonshine!! ;) hahahahahahaha!!!

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#2889    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:53 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:43 PM, said:

On the contrary, and unfortunately for  you,  it does. Now, where is your evidence that proves me wrong?
Care to explain how knowing people in the Pentagon makes what you are telling us more credible how exactly??

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#2890    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2013 - 12:56 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:49 PM, said:

A car is not an airplane nor can a comparison be made with airline simulators and your F1 car simulator, which any pilot wili tell you. Since you failed to provide the evidence that  I asked for, we now find ourselves in a new inning, so for you, that means, strike one
A car is not a plane. Oh and here is me thinking that cars were planes...........lol

Of course a comparator can be made, but you are too simple to understand it.

In other words, just because I can do something in a simulation, that doesn't automatically translate to me being able to do it in the real world.

Sorry but that wasn't a strike, I just hit a home run and the crowds going wild! lol

Edited by Stundie, 09 September 2013 - 12:58 PM.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#2891    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:00 PM

View PostStundie, on 09 September 2013 - 12:51 PM, said:

You use the worst comparators for the WTC collapse like the Windsor Building, a 3rd world toy factory...

Fact: The steel frame building of the Kader Toy factory collapse due to fire, so for you, that is strike Two

Quote

...and an overpass as REAL evidence to support your theory

Fire weakened the steel structure of that overpass, which cause it to collapse, Read the reports, so for  you, that is strke three.

Now, we find ourselves in inning #3

Quote

.., even though the closer comparators like all the other buildings which are high rise steel structures are NOT REAL evidence because they don't support your theory.

On the contrary, it proves that fire can weaken steel structures to the point of failure. That's strike one.

Quote


You then proceed to tell us that none of the closer comparators were not hit by a plane, even though the WTC7 wasn't either.


One the contrary, WTC7 suffered from massive impact damage, which means, strike two.

Quote

You then tell us that none of the closer comparators suffered debris damage, even though WTC 5 suffered more damage and fires than WTC7!


WTC5 did in fact, suffered from internal collapse due to fire, so, that is the end of this inning because for you, that's strike three.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2892    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:05 PM

View PostStundie, on 09 September 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

Care to explain how knowing people in the Pentagon makes what you are telling us more credible how exactly??

It is all very simple. They said  a B-757 struck the Pentagon, which was confirmed by the owner of that B-757, American Airlines, and by the manufacturer of that B-757, the Boeing Aircraft Company, both of whom sent the conversion formulas for the FDR of American 77, that are unique and pertained ONLY to that particular airframe and no other aircraft.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2893    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:06 PM

View PostStundie, on 09 September 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

A car is not a plane. Oh and here is me thinking that cars were planes...........

Good, because for you, that is strike one.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#2894    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:12 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

Fact: The steel frame building of the Kader Toy factory collapse due to fire, so for you, that is strike Two
Sorry but that was a home run because better comparators such as all of the other steel framed high rise buildings never collapsed from fires.

So that 1 for the Stundie Dodgers over 0 for the Sky Eagles.

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

Fire weakened the steel structure of that overpass, which cause it to collapse, Read the reports, so for  you, that is strke three.
Sorry but an over pass is not a high rise steel structure and the better comparators such as all of the other steel framed high rise buildings never collapsed from fires.

So that's a 2nd home run for the Stundie Dodgers, so that's 2 over 0 for the Sky Eagles.

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

Now, we find ourselves in inning #3

On the contrary, it proves that fire can weaken steel structures to the point of failure. That's strike one.
Oh know!! He's thrown a no ball. A strawman!!

Seeing as I have never argued or suggested than fire cannot weaken a steel structure to the point of failure.

It's an argument you keep making up with your fantasy imagination and then apply to someon

Still 2 to the Stundie Dodgers & 0 to the Sky Eagles!

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

One the contrary, WTC7 suffered from massive impact damage, which means, strike two.
Oh know, it's a another Home Run ! The Sky Eagles pitcher is having a bad day.

Seeing as WTC5 suffered from massive impact damage and didn't collapse!

Therefore the ball has been knocked out of the park!

So that's 3 V 0 to the Stundie Dodgers.

View Postskyeagle409, on 09 September 2013 - 12:08 PM, said:

WTC5 did in fact, suffered from internal collapse due to fire, so, that is the end of this inning because for you, that's strike three.
Oh but it's a no ball because the WTC5 didn't collapse entirely like the WTC 1, 2 or 7.

Its not looking good for the Sky Eagles who are looking like little league players! lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#2895    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,610 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:14 PM

View PostStundie, on 09 September 2013 - 12:51 PM, said:

You use the worst comparators for the WTC collapse like the Windsor Building,...

It is all very simple. Read the report and review the photos where you can see where the steel structure collapsed due to fire, but the concrete core remained standing. For you, that means Strike two.

Quote

a 3rd world toy factory and an overpass as REAL evidence to support your theory, even though the closer comparators like all the other buildings which are high rise steel structures are NOT REAL evidence because they don't support your theory.

Considering that fire was responsible for weakening the steel structure, means strike three.

Quote

You then proceed to tell us that none of the closer comparators were not hit by a plane, even though the WTC7 wasn't either.

WTC7 suffered from a massive impact damage, and we can take a look here to see just how huge that hole was on the south side.

"On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately ten stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out," Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator for the National Institute of Standards and Technology"

http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm

Time for a new inning!

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users