Surely these can't be civilian deaths...

[Cali Scott]

The problem with electrolysis, is one must expend more energy to extract hydrogen and oxygen, than hydrogen ends up producing. Storage is also a problem, due to the reactivity of these elements. Nuclear subs already have an abundance of electricity, and the energy derived negates the need for hydrogen onboard. Hence, the only useful product being oxygen, and hydrogen being waste.

The formula for this is 1.4 joules of electricity is injected to produce 1 joule of hydrogen, and the accompanying oxygen. On the other hand, (if one was after hydrogen as an energy source) if fossil fuels are used to provide this energy, pollution becomes a problem thereby defeating the benefit of using a fuel cell to achieve this. It would be more efficient to use fossil fuel directly, so we're back to square one. Until a more clever method is discovered, we will continue to chase our own tail.

Wow, well that doesn't sound very efficient at all, does it! Maybe one day, they'll develop a more efficient process. I guess that we're married to fossil fuels for a while to come.

Interesting that the oil companies are making record profits this year. SUPPOSEDLY, they had to raise the prices at the pumps to cover the increase of wholesale costs of crude. If they're making even MORE money now, that must not be true.

What's gasoline cost per litre up there now?

 

[Damaged]

Wow! And what cunning psychic feat did you utilize to asses where I personally stand on the position? Surely you wouldn't have done something as ignorant as ASSume that because I put a link on there I believe 100% of what is contained therein? I believe that I said "Check this out" and that's all.
Some information is possible, you have to prove that you have a viable, working model to Patent it in the first place. He gives some copies of Patents so.... Have I checked out all of them at the U.S. Patent Office? No. Do I care? No becaue Ifeel that it will not change the present situation one iota.

You scoff at the concept of a car running on water all the while ignoring my comment on Submarines seperating oxygen from water. Could it be because you are too dull to come up with an intelligent comment about it?

Of course, you probably didn't bother to check out any of the SUPPORTING documents linked to in there did ya. Nope, the ignorant ones never do.

This proves that you are one of those ignoramuses that believe all that they are told (my god there are a lot of 'em here!).

The truth is is that it was always widely known in Columbus' time that the world was round. His friend was Piri Reis who was the creator of the famous map. There were MANY maps available at the time that were copied from still older maps as Reis' map was.
[/FLAME]

Cali,

There's only one ignorant person in this conversation and most know who it is.

You spend countless hours per day arguing with almost everyone that you are superior than most everyone else and all others are like sheep and just follow what they are told. News flash, many people have their own opinions on these matters but do not feel compelled to try and convince everyone else that they are right and everyone else is wrong.
You truely are small minded...good luck with it.

 

[Cali Scott]

Cali,

There's only one ignorant person in this conversation and most know who it is.

You spend countless hours per day arguing with almost everyone that you are superior than most everyone else and all others are like sheep and just follow what they are told. News flash, many people have their own opinions on these matters but do not feel compelled to try and convince everyone else that they are right and everyone else is wrong.
You truely are small minded...good luck with it.

Me, eh?

I'm not the one that ASSUMED someones position on things based on a link that was posted. I am also not the one who made desparaging remarks without even checking out the facts or reading. IF you would have read, you would see that there are Patents on these items. However, you chose to shoot off yer mouth without even checking it out or determining my position on the matter. No matter how one slices it, THAT is ignorance dude. My position on that article is I just don't know (or care that much). I DO doubt that if viable alternatives existed that the Oil companies wouldn't do whatever was in their power to stop it.

Go look up the history of Nikola Tesla sometime. He invented or discovered: the radio (NOT Marconi), A/C power, vaccum tubes, the Flourescent light, Microwaves, Xrays, RADAR and you probably never heard of him in school; there's damn good reason for that as well.

Again you make assumptions, this time based on my intent. Why do you think that I am trying to change ANYONE's mind? I stated my intentions several times in the WTC thread but again, you do not read -or- have troubles comprehending what you do read. Where do you get the feeling that I feel I am superior to anyone? I do not say or imply that anywhere. The only time that I even come close to doing that is when the ignorant comment without reading or checking the facts. You need to go back and READ and comprehend what is being written and then comment.

Countless hours? See, when you exaggerate like that, it doesn't help your case.

I don't pretend to know what REALLY happened on that day; it cannot be known. I only counter with the facts that ARE out there for us to look at.

Tell ya what though, if we are forced to withdraw from Iraq and then we have another terrorist attack here, this time commited by Iranians and we go to war with them, that'll prove it (to me at least).

 

[mick_eight]

Cali exposed

Wow now it all becomes clear. Cali you spilled it with the Tesla remark.
Tesla is wildly taught in Elec/eng.But he was also compulsive to the extreme.
He would change silverware with each bite,litter the floor with napkins etc.
Do you believe he was from space ,extraterrarestrail some think?
And why do you think he was ill treated?
He was treated better than a lot of talented nutbars, Nash comes to mind,among others.
Do you think you may have a toein the dark waters of obsession?

 

[Cali Scott]

Wow now it all becomes clear. Cali you spilled it with the Tesla remark.
Tesla is wildly taught in Elec/eng. But he was also compulsive to the extreme.
He would change silverware with each bite,litter the floor with napkins etc.

Yeah and Einstein couldn't even dress himself. Doesn't meant that their discoveries are any the less valuable, does it? I hadn't heard that about Tesla that but it was reported that he was obsessive compulsive.

I was taught basic and advanced electronics as well as nuclear power by the U.S. Navy but never encountered his name once while there. We hear all about his rival, T. Edison but never about Tesla.

Do you believe he was from space ,extraterrarestrail some think?

WHAT?!?!?!?! Talk about left-field dude, where'd that come from? WTF is with everyone putting words into my mouth on this thread. Listen Mick, the WTC stuff is all based on FACTS that are presented by the media and physical evidence. The other thread is based upon the FACTS put forth by the paper such as buildings falling at (nearly) free fall. I just attempt to put them together in a way that ALL of the pieces actually fit together under one story instead of a story that has 3 dozen holes in it held together by belief.

This is how science is conducted: You come up with a hypothesis and then set out to disprove it. I am here in those threads to try to disprove it but all I get is Yahoo's that don't even bother to read except for SWG. Every bit of scientific fact that has been proven was once thought bizarre or "nutty", every one.

And why do you think he was ill treated?
He was treated better than a lot of talented nutbars, Nash comes to mind,among others.Do you think you may have a toein the dark waters of obsession?

I think that he was "forgotten" and burried, not ill treated. He had inventions that he wrote the government about claiming that they could be used in the defense of this country. Probably something along the lines of Scalar electromagnetic weapons that Bearden speaks of as he calls them "Tesla" weapons. (I'll betcha that now I'll hear about Bearden too).

Tesla said ""Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can drive the world's machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any other of the common fuels." This was pretty much widely believed at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century but vanished later. It (Aether) coming back into favor now with the new Quantum Physics.

Just remember that "nutbar" the next time you turn on your offce lights, plug something in to the power main or need to get that fracture X-rayed.

Are you actually comparing Tesla to Nash?! Huge diffrence in contributions to science and psychological diagnosis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

 

[mick_eight]

Yeah and Einstein coundln't even dress himself. Doesn't meant that their discoveries are any the less valuable, does it? I hadn't heard about him that but it was reported that he was obsessive compulsive.
I was taught basic and advanced electronics as well as nuclear power by the U.S. Navy but never encountered his name once while there. We hear all about his rival, T. Edison but never about Tesla.


WHAT?!?!?!?! Talk about left-field dude, where'd that come from? WTF is with everyone putting words into my mouth on this thread. Listen Mick, the WTC stuff is all based on FACTS that are presented by the media and physical evidence. The other thread is based upon the FACTS put forth by the paper such as buildings falling at (nearly) free fall. I just attempt to put them together in a way that ALL of the pieces actually fits together under one story instead of a story that has 3 dozen holes in it held together by belief.



I think that he was "forgotten" and burried, not ill treated. He had inventions that he wrote the government about claiming that they could be used in the defense of this country. Probably something along the lines of Scalar electromagnetic weapons that Bearden speaks of as he calls them "Tesla" weapons. (I'll betcha that now I'll hear about Bearden too).

Tesla said ""Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can drive the world's machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any other of the common fuels." This was pretty much widely believed at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century but vanished later. It (Aether) coming back into favor now with the new Quantum Physics.

Just remember that "nutbar" the next time you turn on your offce lights, plug something in to the power main or need to get that fracture X-rayed.

Are you actually comparing Tesla to Nash?! Huge diffrence in contributions to science and psychological diagnosis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

I now know you only hear what you want to hear.
You need to read more about Tesla. You seem to think I'm Diss Him.
Au contre mon ami.
I think Nick was one of the greatest minds of the 20th century,but he was a milliamp short of a amp in the civil graces. Westinghouse owed him millions in royality for AC motor.
He also designed the power generators on the Colorado river, so he could use them in his experiments on wireless power.
He said power could be put into earth at NY NY and light a bulb in Paris.
It isn't me saying he was a Alien. Dig a little deeper into his life and you will see how odd he was.
It may be a clue to why he was forgotten so quick by the mainstream.
Sorta like how you will be forgotten when you fall in the pool.
And Guess what? Nash was a math man,but biggest contribution was in world finance.
Now I think your up to your waist. A tad touchey about mental illness are we not?

 

[Cali Scott]

I now know you only hear what you want to hear.
You need to read more about Tesla. You seem to think I'm Diss Him.
Au contre mon ami.
I think Nick was one of the greatest minds of the 20th century,but he was a milliamp short of a amp in the civil graces. Westinghouse owed him millions in royality for AC motor.

I don't understand; are you saying that his inventions and theories would should be taken less seriously because he was obsessive compulsive? I should think that if anything, it would mean that he would be that much more finicky about documenting and validating them. IOW, what does his brain's chemical balance have to do with it? I saw this autistic dude on TV that was a total mathematics savant, just because he couldn't function regularly in life doesn't mean that his mathematical ability was any less valid.

I just don't get what it has to do with Tesla's work. You claim he did great work so why is "oddness" a factor at all? As I pointed out, Einstein was reported to have been lacking in social graces as well but look at his theories and his state of renown. It can only become a factor if others utilize these against him (I take it that you feel he was not famous because of the OCD?). I mean, his works stands on it's own, why relegate him to a footnote in history because he was quirky?

He also designed the power generators on the Colorado river, so he could use them in his experiments on wireless power.
He said power could be put into earth at NY NY and light a bulb in Paris.
It isn't me saying he was a Alien. Dig a little deeper into his life and you will see how odd he was.

I didn't know that.

I think that I read along ago about him getting information on his experiments from "others" (or was that Keeley?). That's the only alien context that comes to mind. Whatever, they sure worked!

It may be a clue to why he was forgotten so quick by the mainstream.
Sorta like how you will be forgotten when you fall in the pool.
And Guess what? Nash was a math man,but biggest contribution was in world finance.

That wasn't the intention of the formula but math is math and it works! His work IIRC, was prior to the Schizophrenia kicking un full gear. Schizophrenia is NOT OCD Mick, it's a long way off!

Now I think your up to your waist. A tad touchey about mental illness are we not?

No, just not certain if you are dismissing his work based upon his OCD. What in that sentence makes it sound as if I am "touchy"?

 

[mick_eight]

Cali. I admire your zeel for the truth,and in a lot of ways you make a lot of sense.
I have a problem with how you fail to see the futility of what you are trying to do on a hooker review board. That in itself would give rise to question about your mental stabilty.
I've had a long history with explosives,they don't always do what you expect. There are too many varibles to predict with any model what will happen.
What you think can never be proven beyond doubt,because the sequence of events can not be duplicated. so it's all conjucture.
With Moores Law telling us information doubles every 18 months,no one person can ever keep up with it ,so we can quote an argue till the cows come home and not change a thing.
Give it a rest, go for a walk,have a beer or two.
I know a lot about Tesla because I wrote a paper about him once[with spell check] In my research the most amazing thing i read was that his grandmother was a famous seamstress,it is said she could tie 3 knots in a eyelash.
Take care and remember ,have some fun here.
The best defense is a good offense.

 

[Cali Scott]

Cali. I admire your zeel for the truth,and in a lot of ways you make a lot of sense.
I have a problem with how you fail to see the futility of what you are trying to do on a hooker review board. That in itself would give rise to question about your mental stabilty.

Well first off. I just presented it as news (which it was). The paper was just released. I am not a member of any other boards and there's a wide variety of subject matter discussed here. Finally, it doesn't do any good to talk about it on a "Conspiracy" board because that would be preaching to the choir.

Almost 2000 views on the WTC thread and a few PM related to it so I'd say that pehaps a few will look into the subject further.

I've had a long history with explosives,they don't always do what you expect. There are too many varibles to predict with any model what will happen.
What you think can never be proven beyond doubt,because the sequence of events can not be duplicated. so it's all conjucture.

Yeah, of course. Otherwise there wouldn't be any controversy because someone else would have already proven it.

With Moores Law telling us information doubles every 18 months,no one person can ever keep up with it ,so we can quote an argue till the cows come home and not change a thing.
Give it a rest, go for a walk,have a beer or two.
I know a lot about Tesla because I wrote a paper about him once[with spell check]

With spell check, LOL! So, you are familiar with the ramifications of what he developed (I'm not talking about the inventions we are using today).

In my research the most amazing thing i read was that his grandmother was a famous seamstress,it is said she could tie 3 knots in a eyelash.

He and his work were quote amazing. If you look at the ramifications of what he developed that could be a clue to why he is marginalized despite his brilliance and contributions. He developed a device(s) that promised free energy or a over-unity device. Further, the devices had an application for warcraft. It's entirely possible that he has been marginalized because his concepts actually worked.

Take care and remember ,have some fun here.
The best defense is a good offense.

I always have fun man. Life's boring otherwise. I have an amazing 7 year old little girl that never fails to make me smile or even laugh.

Re: Good offense I just defend myself if attacked. People are free to believe whatever they want. I was jsut hoping to have a little more of a substantive debate on it and maybe learn more.

I'm off to start Thanksgiving dinner.

Later.

 

[Damaged]

I'm not the one that ASSUMED someones position on things based on a link that was posted. I am also not the one who made desparaging remarks without even checking out the facts or reading. IF you would have read, you would see that there are Patents on these items...
...you do not read -or- have troubles comprehending what you do read... You need to go back and READ and comprehend what is being written and then comment.

Countless hours? See, when you exaggerate like that, it doesn't help your case.

I don't pretend to know what REALLY happened on that day; it cannot be known. I only counter with the facts that ARE out there for us to look at...

Cali,
It looks to me like you are the one assuming things about me. Like I didn't read or can't comprehend. Your preach but do not follow your own words.
The countless hours is an easy observation based on the number of posts and the time it would take to read all of the articles for you to post so authoritively on the subject matter. That time would be better spent with your 7 year old.
The facts that you quote come from media sources that are not better than the ones that counter your beliefs. Why do you choose to believe one source more than another?
Cali, Why do you think most people "attack" you as you put it?

 

[Cali Scott]

Cali,
It looks to me like you are the one assuming things about me. Like I didn't read or can't comprehend. Your preach but do not follow your own words.
The countless hours is an easy observation based on the number of posts and the time it would take to read all of the articles for you to post so authoritively on the subject matter. That time would be better spent with your 7 year old.
The facts that you quote come from media sources that are not better than the ones that counter your beliefs. Why do you choose to believe one source more than another?
Cali, Why do you think most people "attack" you as you put it?

It appeared to me that if you would have read the article you would have seen and followed the links that validate what the writer was speaking of.

I have been following alternative energy for a long time and 9/11 for about 2 1/2 years or so. Lot's of time to read.

Yes, the facts come from the very same media sources and others. I put them together in a different way than the FEMA report though. I believe the picture that I put together because it fully explains what would otherwise be holes in the official story. I believe them because I feel that the way the buildings fell is impossible to explain otherwise. IMO. They just cannot fall like that or tha rapidly otherwise.

Why do I think that people attack me? Go read that thread on Prof. Jones' paper again and you'll see why! Rather than just disagreeing there's idiots like therealrex and others blowing me sh*t.

Do you believe that if you invented something to obtain "free" energy that you would be allowed to put it into production or put out the work into the public eye without ridicule or worse?

 

[therealrex]

It's a shame Tesla was as unstable as he was he could have improved the world much more than he did which was more than any other person I can think of. He also created the coolest thing I ever bought : the Tesla Coil.
As for the conspiracy idiots like prof Jones the reason he is an idiot is because he uses critical thinking(which may or may not be correct) to dispute the accepted version and then offers up the conspiracy version without using the same critical thinking to justify an idea that is much more unlikely.

As far as the original topic goes I was originally very critical of the US soldiers for shooting civilians and reporters because their cars either avoided or didn't see checkpoints but since they are being blown up daily I can certainly see their point of view. But now the relatives of the people in that car will now either support or become terrorists meaning more car bombs and more civilians shot by soldiers so the only answer is to pull out.

 

[Cali Scott]

It's a shame Tesla was as unstable as he was he could have improved the world much more than he did which was more than any other person I can think of. He also created the coolest thing I ever bought : the Tesla Coil.

I don't know, there are a lot of folks that function quite normally with OCD. How would this affect his ability to invent? BTW, he DID improve the world quite a bit!

As for the conspiracy idiots like prof Jones the reason he is an idiot is because he uses critical thinking(which may or may not be correct) to dispute the accepted version and then offers up the conspiracy version without using the same critical thinking to justify an idea that is much more unlikely.

Okay, the fact that you read the paper in 12 minutes is REALLY showing now. NOWHERE in there does he present a theory as to why, who or what happend. He suggests explosives because of the many reports of explosions by many witnesses who were there. He does not offer the conspiracy version at all. He explains why the buildings could not fail as the NIST report suggests and that those alleged failures were unduplicatable. He indicated explosives as the only reasonable cause of the buildings falling the way that they did. He is attempting to prove that the other theory, that FIRE brought down the buildings, is impossible and so the only other possibility is explosives. Explosives are the only answer to the "hot spots" under the buildings as well. The hilights are as follows:

• The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" — and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."

• No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.

• WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors — and intact steel support columns — the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.

• With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing — and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."

• Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.

• Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel — and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.

• Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.

• Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.

As far as the original topic goes I was originally very critical of the US soldiers for shooting civilians and reporters because their cars either avoided or didn't see checkpoints but since they are being blown up daily I can certainly see their point of view. But now the relatives of the people in that car will now either support or become terrorists meaning more car bombs and more civilians shot by soldiers so the only answer is to pull out.

For once, we agree.

 

[therealrex]

I'll make my point with a couple of examples since I'm no expert I can't refute the science but a lot of his points are just based on so called witness reports and the way the building fell looked like a building brought down by explosives I've seen this style of lazy science before in all the conspiracy nut theories thats why it only took me 12 minutes to read.He offers no scientific proof of explosives at all just a lot of conjecture. For anyone to suggest that explosives were used is automatically agreeing that an enormous conspiracy of thousands of people in the White House, Fema, FAA,FBI and CIA as well as the Fire and Police (who would have sacrificed 100's of their own) were all in on this. Here are a few of the most easily refutable:

• No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.
Even I know that the design of the WTC towers were unique and unlike any other steel frame building.
• Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.

May have been the result of thermite??? Thats pretty scientific. If Thermite was used it would have been extremely easy to identify but none was found so either there was none used or else massive conspiracy there are no other possiblities so to accept the latter you are endorsing the conspiracy.
• Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.
What scientific methods did he use to determine that these witnesses were credible. In these circumstances how can anyone accurately tell where the sound was coming from?
These were very unique buildings that underwent a unique series of events and the explanation forwarded is based on limited information information so naturally some of it may be incorrect but this nutbag repeatedly mentions explosives without any proof whatsoever which a responsible scientist would have to have before offering this up as a possibility.

 

[Cali Scott]

I'll make my point with a couple of examples since I'm no expert I can't refute the science but a lot of his points are just based on so called witness reports and the way the building fell looked like a building brought down by explosives I've seen this style of lazy science before in all the conspiracy nut theories thats why it only took me 12 minutes to read.He offers no scientific proof of explosives at all just a lot of conjecture. For anyone to suggest that explosives were used is automatically agreeing that an enormous conspiracy of thousands of people in the White House, Fema, FAA,FBI and CIA as well as the Fire and Police

Why so many? Not Fire / Police or FAA (Why them?)? FBI almost allowed terrorists to blow up the WTC in '93. Only would take a handfull of people. How many did it take to set up the Murrah building? I remember watching on the news as they pulled other explosives out of the inside of that building.

(who would have sacrificed 100's of their own) were all in on this. Here are a few of the most easily refutable:

• No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.
Even I know that the design of the WTC towers were unique and unlike any other steel frame building.

Not true, the fire in the hotel in Madrid was a building of similar design as was the fire in L.A..

• Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.

May have been the result of thermite??? Thats pretty scientific. If Thermite was used it would have been extremely easy to identify but none was found so either there was none used or else massive conspiracy there are no other possiblities so to accept the latter you are endorsing the conspiracy.

No dude, you're not reading again and it's showing. Hell yes Thermite would be easy to identify except oh yeah, they DESTROYED THE EVIDENCE!

• Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.
What scientific methods did he use to determine that these witnesses were credible. In these circumstances how can anyone accurately tell where the sound was coming from?

There are all kinds of reports from witnesses talking about explosions.Everyone from Firemen to officeworkers both insisde the building and outside. It has been widely reported in newspapers and on the television. Where have you been?

These were very unique buildings that underwent a unique series of events and the explanation forwarded is based on limited information information so naturally some of it may be incorrect but this nutbag repeatedly mentions explosives without any proof whatsoever which a responsible scientist would have to have before offering this up as a possibility.

Ummm, look again. The "Official" position is based upon no evidence as well and is equally scientific. It's pretty obvious that you have not read this in it's entirety (if at all). The proof is in the way that it fell.

 

[Damaged]

therealrex,
Do bother wasting your time. It's obvious that anyone that doesn't agree with him is ignorant, and hasn't read all of the links he has provided...otherwise they would agree with him.

 

[Cali Scott]

therealrex,
Do bother wasting your time. It's obvious that anyone that doesn't agree with him is ignorant, and hasn't read all of the links he has provided...otherwise they would agree with him.

No Twit, otherwise they wouldn't claim that Jones had said things that he did not!

Your own ignorance continues. I have replied twice to you here in this thread and you have been unable to respond intelligently. Now, you are attacking me in third person - what a pussy!

 

[Cali Scott]

BTW therealrex, here are some of the "alleged" witnesses. Scroll down to "CREDIBLE SOURCES SUCH AS NEW YORK FIREFIGHTERS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ". You probably won't read it either because you believe that already you know everything there is to on this matter but but what the hell, you might decide to educate yourself so:
http://www.911proof.com/

 

[Ilovethemall]

jobs?

Cali, out of curiosity - please tell me you are retired and have an abundance of time on your hands.....if not, then you sir, are the biggest "time theft" employee ever

 

[Cali Scott]

Cali, out of curiosity - please tell me you are retired and have an abundance of time on your hands.....if not, then you sir, are the biggest "time theft" employee ever

LOL!!! No, I work for myself ILTM. I am waiting on some slooooow reports.