Science says there were no hijackers on 911

[camlok]

Wow you got 1 loon to say it is impossible when the vast majority of scientists and engineers not only think it was possible KNOW that it happened.
Ill take the opinions of the overwhelming majority over the crazy few

That's completely false. Not a US scientist from the US academic community would debate a reality professor who knows that the US government official conspiracy theory is pure bunko. And here you are, and your compatriots, supporting those who murdered 2700+ that day then millions more afterwards.

How low can a group of individuals go? I suspect you folks haven't even begun your descent to the bottom.

How come you never quote any of these "vast majority"? It's yet another Quag non-science moment.

 

[camlok]

Sure but so far all any truther has provided is claims.

How would you know, you guys won't read or watch anything because you know that each time you do you'll get smacked upside the head with proof you don't want to see - that is if there is someone who can explain it to you.

 

[camlok]

If he provides evidence of molten steel then we will consider it.

You wouldn't know evidence or science if it walked up and smacked you in the mouth, zyzygy. You have never a once provided anything but peanut gallery comments, comments that have zero to do with science or common sense.

You know diddily squat about 911 or anything else, including the English language.

 

[Quag]

How come you don't mention that those ideal conditions were not even close to being met on 911.

How come you don't actually bother trying to learn anything about what you post?

How come you don't actually put an apostrophe in "don't"?

Because it doesnt require ideal conditions to get over 1800F, in ideal conditions it can get to 4040F.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel
How come you don't actually bother trying to learn anything about what you post?
I dont use an apostrophe because I use 3 different keyboards that use different keys for the apostrophe and normal humans can read "cant" without any difficulty.

 

[Quag]

That's completely false. Not a US scientist from the US academic community would debate a reality professor who knows that the US government official conspiracy theory is pure bunko. And here you are, and your compatriots, supporting those who murdered 2700+ that day then millions more afterwards.

How low can a group of individuals go? I suspect you folks haven't even begun your descent to the bottom.

How come you never quote any of these "vast majority"? It's yet another Quag non-science moment.

Very common for people to refuse to engage loons and lend any hint legitimacy to their claims by doing so.
However you yourself have already posted that engineers accept that the uncotrolled fires can bring down a building.

New York Times journalist James Glanz, writing near the end of 2001 about the collapse of WTC 7, reported that some engineers said that a “combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down

 

[camlok]

New York Times journalist James Glanz, writing near the end of 2001 about the collapse of WTC 7, reported that some engineers said that a “combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down

Those would be the engineers who don't understand what it means to support science. Instead they lie and support war criminals and terrorist who will murder even their own.

"some engineers". Who are these cowards who are so wrong? Fire has never before or since brought down a steel framed high rise.

And to suggest that fires, which have never done it, could do so at free fall and accelerating speed are not engineers at all, they are shills/cowards that hide in the dark, supporting criminals.

The molten and vaporized steel tell it all, along with the nanothermite, that US government/military high explosive, the one that combines the best of all previous explosives, the nanothermite that was found in WTC dust, along with the by products of thermitic reactions.

And the molten molybdenum, vaporized lead, the voluminous iron microspheres, the product of the nanothermite.

Why do you so steadfastly maintain such a delusional position?

Brainwashing, that's the only possibility.

 

[Quag]

Those would be the engineers who don't understand what it means to support science. Instead they lie and support war criminals and terrorist who will murder even their own.

"some engineers". Who are these cowards who are so wrong? Fire has never before or since brought down a steel framed high rise.

And to suggest that fires, which have never done it, could do so at free fall and accelerating speed are not engineers at all, they are shills/cowards that hide in the dark, supporting criminals.

The molten and vaporized steel tell it all, along with the nanothermite, that US government/military high explosive, the one that combines the best of all previous explosives, the nanothermite that was found in WTC dust, along with the by products of thermitic reactions.

And the molten molybdenum, vaporized lead, the voluminous iron microspheres, the product of the nanothermite.

Why do you so steadfastly maintain such a delusional position?

Brainwashing, that's the only possibility.

Lol
So ONLY the handfull of engineers that say it wasnt the fires are true engineers,and the vast majority of them that dont have a problem with fires causing the collapses are just incompetant charlatans
Why do you steadfastly maintain such a delusional and dishonest position?

 

[camlok]

Lol
So ONLY the handfull of engineers that say it wasnt the fires are true engineers,and the vast majority of them that dont have a problem with fires causing the collapses are just incompetant charlatans
Why do you steadfastly maintain such a delusional and dishonest position?

It's your position that is the totally delusional and dishonest position. AE911 engineers do science, they put their names and reputations out there. They don't hide behind "some engineers", like you are doing.

Note that you never provide any information from all these silent engineers. And you, with you "inquiring" mind don't even wonder why they are all stone cold silent about the most phantasmagorical, nutty, out of this world, completely crazy US government conspiracy theory.

You don't even address the fact that the US governments silly theory, that goes totally against science, is a conspiracy theory. But you never address anything. Anti-truthers just do diversions and concealment.

 

[Quag]

It's your position that is the totally delusional and dishonest position. AE911 engineers do science, they put their names and reputations out there. They don't hide behind "some engineers", like you are doing.

Note that you never provide any information from all these silent engineers. And you, with you "inquiring" mind don't even wonder why they are all stone cold silent about the most phantasmagorical, nutty, out of this world, completely crazy US government conspiracy theory.

You don't even address the fact that the US governments silly theory, that goes totally against science, is a conspiracy theory. But you never address anything. Anti-truthers just do diversions and concealment.

AE911 are a very few nutjob CTers using ideology instead of reason to come to their conclusiosn.
Got any actual evidence top support your claims?
Didnt think so.

 

[camlok]

AE911 are a very few nutjob CTers using ideology instead of reason to come to their conclusiosn.

Yet you can't address their science because you anti-truthers never want to discuss science. You want diversions, obfuscation, ..., which you are actually terrible at, but you persist nevertheless.

Got any actual evidence top support your claims?
.

Got any science to explain this?

How did the nose cone of the WTC2 jet pass thru two walls of 14" steel box columns and be in perfect shape.

Watch from 0:05.

The missile that hit WTC 2 in Slow Motion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpEct4q4z9o

 

[Quag]

Yet you can't address their science because you anti-truthers never want to discuss science. You want diversions, obfuscation, ..., which you are actually terrible at, but you persist nevertheless.

What science?

Got any science to explain this?

How did the nose cone of the WTC2 jet pass thru two walls of 14" steel box columns and be in perfect shape.

Watch from 0:05.

The missile that hit WTC 2 in Slow Motion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpEct4q4z9o

Lol

 

[camlok]

What science?








Lol

Look at all that empty space. That's Quag science. And the forward and conclusion, typical Quag science.

 

[Quag]

Look at all that empty space. That's Quag science. And the forward and conclusion, typical Quag science.

Still no evidence only insults

 

[camlok]

Still no evidence only insults

Lord, you anti-truthers like to rely on the lamest of memes. Pointing out you never offered any evidence or discussion isn't an insult. However, you insult yourself with this oh so lame response.

What will be the next one, Quag? Certainly not anything remotely resembling science or scholarship.

You have not provided any evidence or explanation, and you never will, for

You are the one that has to address how the WTC "plane" was able to fly thru two walls of 14" steel box columns without sustaining any damage. Especially when all the US government conspiracy supporters show in computer simulations the jet being shredded.

How many columns of no evidence can we expect in your next anti-truther "science exposition"? Have you sent out a call for anti-truther reinforcements?

 

[zyzygy]

Still no evidence only insults

He has only insults.

 

[braindrain]

Yet you can't address their science because you anti-truthers never want to discuss science. You want diversions, obfuscation, ..., which you are actually terrible at, but you persist nevertheless.

o missile in sight. Maybe you need to get your eyes checked.



Got any science to explain this?

How did the nose cone of the WTC2 jet pass thru two walls of 14" steel box columns and be in perfect shape.

Watch from 0:05.

The missile that hit WTC 2 in Slow Motion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpEct4q4z9o

lol. This proves it you really can't be serious. You have to be trolling.
Watched the video 3 times. There is no missile in hitting anything. Maybe you need to get glasses

 

[zyzygy]

lol. This proves it you really can't be serious. You have to be trolling.
Watched the video 3 times. There is no missile in hitting anything. Maybe you need to get glasses

A missile shaped like a airliner with big wings, in other words an airliner.

 

[camlok]

lol. This proves it you really can't be serious. You have to be trolling.
Watched the video 3 times. There is no missile in hitting anything. Maybe you need to get glasses

I never said there was a missile. You anti-truthers are always true to form.

As I have explained numerous times, stop it at 0:06 and step it thru second by second to the point where the "nose cone" disappears in the fireball.

 

[camlok]

A missile shaped like a airliner with big wings, in other words an airliner.

zyzygy "science"; the ultimate anti-truther.

 

[gamolon]

As I have explained numerous times, stop it at 0:06 and step it thru second by second to the point where the "nose cone" disappears in the fireball.

Do you believe it's a nose cone? You keep putting nose cone in quotes.

 

[gamolon]

I never said there was a missile. You anti-truthers are always true to form.

You're kidding right? You have to be...

The missile that hit WTC 2 in Slow Motion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpEct4q4z9o

Are you just playing games now?

 

[Quag]

He has only insults.

Truthers also have their lies:
Pyroclastic flows
Collapsing at free fall
Collapsing in their own footprint
Jet fuel buring at 1800F requires ideal conditions
It was merely office fires
Losing altitude in a turn requires expert piloting skills
ATC trains with injects on live RADAR
etc. etc...

 

[gamolon]

How did the nose cone of the WTC2 jet pass thru two walls of 14" steel box columns and be in perfect shape.

I thought you said the "nose cone" passed through two walls of 14" steel box columns?!


Where's the huge punch out hole where "something" passed through that second wall of perimeter columns?

I guess it was a debris could you saw eh?

 

[braindrain]

I thought you said the "nose cone" passed through two walls of 14" steel box columns?!


Where's the huge punch out hole where "something" passed through that second wall of perimeter columns?

I guess it was a debris could you saw eh?

Poor Camlok. Your post so completely destroys his little theory. It's no wonder he has run away from it in multiple threads now. It's just to bad he doesn't have the integrity to admit he was wrong.

 

[gamolon]

Poor Camlok. Your post so completely destroys his little theory. It's no wonder he has run away from it in multiple threads now. It's just to bad he doesn't have the integrity to admit he was wrong.

It's pretty funny. I don't reply to his posts for a couple of days and I get this:

Hey gamolon, where are you hiding?

I wonder where camlok is hiding?