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

[Merged] 9/11 and operation Gladio


  • Please log in to reply
950 replies to this topic

#16    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,965 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 10 September 2013 - 04:18 AM

Read up to here while trying not to laugh:

Quote


Elizabeth Woodworth, Consensus 911: We have some of the top experts in the field who've published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and yes, these scientific journals exist, like the Heritage Study, but they're never covered in the media.

If people knew about the research, they would find it compelling. Dr. Griffin has said he's never heard of anybody who saw the evidence, became converted to this point of view and then changed back.



After reading that garbage, I couldn't help myself.


1. DRG is nothing short of a 9/11 truther parrot.  He is a professor of theology, which has nothing to do with analysis of scientific evidence.

2.  No truther has ever professionally published a paper directly refuting NIST or OCT.

The website seems to be stuck back in 2006 when most of the BS mentioned in that link has already been debunked to the ground.  Reasons like this that RT articles can't be taken seriously.


No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#17    Likely Guy

Likely Guy

    Undecided, mostly.

  • Member
  • 3,969 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Likely, Canada

  • "The problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

Posted 10 September 2013 - 05:00 AM

View PostRaptorBites, on 10 September 2013 - 04:18 AM, said:


Read up to here while trying not to laugh

Elizabeth Woodworth, Consensus 911: We have some of the top experts in the field who've published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and yes, these scientific journals exist, like the Heritage Study, but they're never covered in the media.

If people knew about the research, they would find it compelling. Dr. Griffin has said he's never heard of anybody who saw the evidence, became converted to this point of view and then changed back.


After reading that garbage, I couldn't help myself.


1. DRG is nothing short of a 9/11 truther parrot.  He is a professor of theology, which has nothing to do with analysis of scientific evidence.

2.  No truther has ever professionally published a paper directly refuting NIST or OCT.

The website seems to be stuck back in 2006 when most of the BS mentioned in that link has already been debunked to the ground.  Reasons like this that RT articles can't be taken seriously.


There. Now I can read it.

Edited by Likely Guy, 10 September 2013 - 05:08 AM.


#18    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,675 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 10 September 2013 - 06:29 AM

View PostLikely Guy, on 10 September 2013 - 03:06 AM, said:

Today I was reading about Jeff Plager (mini-nukes guy) from a guy's website (Christopher Bollyn, if I remember right) that has absolute proof that 'super-thermite' was used.

He claims that Jeff Plager is a 'dis-info' agent, who is using the 'truther' movement to discredit it. It is funny how the competing theorists step over each other to prove their theory right, and all the while the OCT (Official Conspiracy Theory) is still, I find, the most logical and probable.

I have been telling 911 truthers for some time now that some of the stories they have been posting was false, misleading and deliberately planted in order to discredit the 911 truther movement. I even caught Robert Balsamo of "Pilots for 911 Truth" on many occasions posting false and misleading information and any credible pilot should have known that much of what he has been posting is false,

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#19    Likely Guy

Likely Guy

    Undecided, mostly.

  • Member
  • 3,969 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Likely, Canada

  • "The problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell

Posted 10 September 2013 - 08:46 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 10 September 2013 - 06:29 AM, said:


I have been telling 911 truthers for some time now that some of the stories they have been posting was false, misleading and deliberately planted...

Over the last year or so, I've read much of what you said. You're derided for your long posts but, at least you provide your sources. I appreciate and thank you for that.

The following isn't directed at you Skyeagle or anyone else in particular;

If the 'truthers' have 2, 5 or 10 competing theories, and the leaders of each those versions are all vying for book deals and interviews... well, pardon me for not believing them.

This is like a religion vs. atheism debate, given to an agnostic. I see a lot of BS in both, but for now I lean towards the official version. Why?, because it's the 'burden of proof thing'.

On the official side, there's a preponderance. On the conspiracy side however, I believe that it's been scanty, poorly sourced and self argumentative.

All the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 can't be true, so most of them are lies. That's what I believe.


#20    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,965 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 10 September 2013 - 01:47 PM

View PostLikely Guy, on 10 September 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

Over the last year or so, I've read much of what you said. You're derided for your long posts but, at least you provide your sources. I appreciate and thank you for that.

The following isn't directed at you Skyeagle or anyone else in particular;

If the 'truthers' have 2, 5 or 10 competing theories, and the leaders of each those versions are all vying for book deals and interviews... well, pardon me for not believing them.

This is like a religion vs. atheism debate, given to an agnostic. I see a lot of BS in both, but for now I lean towards the official version. Why?, because it's the 'burden of proof thing'.

On the official side, there's a preponderance. On the conspiracy side however, I believe that it's been scanty, poorly sourced and self argumentative.

All the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 can't be true, so most of them are lies. That's what I believe.

You don't care much as to the integrity or accuracy or relevance of his sources, but at least he provides them.  Got it! :whistle:


#21    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,965 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 10 September 2013 - 01:53 PM

View PostLikely Guy, on 10 September 2013 - 03:06 AM, said:

Today I was reading about Jeff Plager (mini-nukes guy) from a guy's website (Christopher Bollyn, if I remember right) that has absolute proof that 'super-thermite' was used.

He claims that Jeff Plager is a 'dis-info' agent, who is using the 'truther' movement to discredit it. It is funny how the competing theorists step over each other to prove their theory right, and all the while the OCT (Official Conspiracy Theory) is still, I find, the most logical and probable.

Prager is the name.

Do you suppose that BOTH thermite and tactical nukes might have been used?  I already know your answer, but what I'm asking does, in theory, the use of one preclude the use of the other?

And after all these years, surprise to me, it appears that the disinfo agent might very well be Steven Jones, who actually did alot of work with muon-catalyzed nuclear fusion and other nuclear research.  It now appears that he might have advanced the thermite theory (which may be valid) in an effort to steer the discussion and investigation away from nuclear devices.

Prager has put things into perspective, and possibly answered so many of the mysteries observed at WTC, including the patterns and types of disease found amongst those working at Ground Zero.


#22    aztek

aztek

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,036 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2006

Posted 10 September 2013 - 02:06 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 10 September 2013 - 12:21 AM, said:

I took this from that link as an example of what I am talking about.



If he looked very closely, the building is not falling at free fall speed. Notice the dust plumes and debris that are falling and outpacing the collapse of the WTC building, which was a clear indication the building was not falling at free fall speed and it is amazing that 911 conspiracist couldn't see that reality despite the evidence of no free fall speed in the photo was staring at them directly in their faces. Simply amazing!!


no it was not falling at free fall speed, it was rather slow decent, i did notice it too watching it happen right in front of my eyes live in person.

Edited by aztek, 10 September 2013 - 02:07 PM.

RESIDENT TROLL.

#23    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,965 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 10 September 2013 - 02:16 PM

View Postaztek, on 10 September 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

no it was not falling at free fall speed, it was rather slow decent, i did notice it too watching it happen right in front of my eyes live in person.

The towers fell at a rate within 10% of absolute free fall, depending upon how one measures it.  That's pretty darn close.  For all practical purposes, the lower structure offered the same resistance as air to the falling upper structure.  That is unnatural, and even Peter Jennings and Dan Rather acknowledged that simple fact.

Most of the world watched it, ad nauseam and for many years of repetition, on TV.

You're lucky they didn't have you there on the pile, breathing the air that Christine Wittman had pronounced "just fine".


#24    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,675 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 10 September 2013 - 06:07 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 10 September 2013 - 01:47 PM, said:

You don't care much as to the integrity or accuracy or relevance of his sources, but at least he provides them.  Got it! :whistle:

How amusing considering that you have been posting references from material on the level of comic books and fantasy. After all, you have been caught posting stories that are known hoaxes. :lol:

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#25    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,675 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 10 September 2013 - 06:11 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 10 September 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

The towers fell at a rate within 10% of absolute free fall, depending upon how one measures it.

Let's take a look.

Posted Image

Well glory be, dust plumes and debris are actually outpacing the collapse of the WTC building as they fall toward the ground which is undeniable proof the WTC building is not falling anywhere near free fall speed and look what you posted!!

You need to stop reading fiction and start reading real publications that reality in them.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#26    aztek

aztek

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,036 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2006

Posted 10 September 2013 - 07:20 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 10 September 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

You're lucky they didn't have you there on the pile, breathing the air that Christine Wittman had pronounced "just fine".

i was  working 3 blocks away, i had to have sepcial pass to enter area.
i was doing clean up of my cooling towers from all the dust, a have been exposed to it, but i wore respirator mask. and i have no health problems due to the air. and i worked in dowtown nyc untill 2011. but those that worked omn the GZ had more exposure. there is a wrong way of wearing a mask, and there is a right one. it does make huge difference.

http://www.zadrogacl..._11 Workers.jpg look how they wear their masks. no wonder they got sick

if you had a slightest idea what it would take to demo building with outside bearing walls as opposed to skeleton building that are showed demoed on tv al the time, you would not be posting this nonesence. wtc towers were build unlike any other building.

a nuke?, a termite?, lmao.

i felt the shockwave (explosion )when plane hit the tower,  there was no shockwave when they fell, only rumble resambling heavy train.

Edited by aztek, 10 September 2013 - 07:37 PM.

RESIDENT TROLL.

#27    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,965 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 10 September 2013 - 07:28 PM

View Postaztek, on 10 September 2013 - 07:20 PM, said:

i was  working 3 blocks away, i had to have sepcial pass to enter area.
i was doing clean up of my cooling towers from all the dust, a have been exposed to it, but i wore respirator mask. and i have no health problems due to the air. and i worked in dowtown nyc untill 2011.

if you had a slightest idea what it would take to demo building with outside bearing walls as opposed to skeleton building that are showed demoed on tv al the time, you would not be posting this nonesence. wtc towers were build unlike any other building.

a nuke?, a termite?, lmao.

i felt the shockwaye when plane hit the tower, there was no shockwave when they fell, only rumble resambling heavy train.

Many people have offered ways the buildings might have been taken down, and I've read a few of them.

The most complete and credible theory is that of nuclear devices.  That answers so many questions that could not be answered by thermite.  But what's to say both could not have been used?


#28    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,965 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 10 September 2013 - 07:30 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 10 September 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

Let's take a look.

Posted Image

Well glory be, dust plumes and debris are actually outpacing the collapse of the WTC building as they fall toward the ground which is undeniable proof the WTC building is not falling anywhere near free fall speed and look what you posted!!

You need to stop reading fiction and start reading real publications that reality in them.

What that particular pictures shows Sky, is the very same profile and look as nuclear weapons tests recorded over the years.

Notice the upward thrust and dust clouds?  That ain't gravity and jetfuel old buddy, them's nuclear weapons miniaturized. :tu:


#29    aztek

aztek

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,036 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2006

Posted 10 September 2013 - 07:48 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 10 September 2013 - 07:28 PM, said:

Many people have offered ways the buildings might have been taken down, and I've read a few of them.

The most complete and credible theory is that of nuclear devices.  That answers so many questions that could not be answered by thermite.  But what's to say both could not have been used?

i really don't know what to say, except LMAO, may be someone else with more patience will.

but one thing i'll say, there was no need to use anything, heat and gravity did all by themselves. and yes it was showed many times on tv how  steel beams soften and lose strenght from heat alone, and fail,  humanity relys on that phenomenon for thousands of years, just ask blacksmiths, and steel workers. actually dying trade of riveting is a great example.

at this point teslas death ray gun, and earthquake machine theory holds more water than nukes and termite, lol. or better yet why not aliens

Edited by aztek, 10 September 2013 - 07:50 PM.

RESIDENT TROLL.

#30    aztek

aztek

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,036 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2006

Posted 10 September 2013 - 07:54 PM

also take a stone and throw it at  sand\dust, what makes the dust\sand go up???

RESIDENT TROLL.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users