9/11 scientific proof that plane's didnt hit...WATCH THREE PARTS

First topic message reminder :

For all you science geeks.
If you don't watch all three vids then don't bother commenting as I want to discuss them.

Made by scientists and comments by experts.

If you sont come away at the very least a little dubious or like this then you're lying.

And!
If you don't watch it perhaps you don't want to know. If that's the case, don't waste my time trying to debate.

Better to watch on a laptop or biggish screen.
PART ONE

So how many of the videos Eddie have you watched that i have posted that comp0letely refute many of the claims you have made on this?

Zero by any chance?

So before you judge others and claim you think you kn ow something when you only have seen a one sided view and the fact you arew not at ll in the know of some basic science, I think you have a cheek to lay claim on others, when many of us have watched many of this videos and sighed deeply at how bad they are

Eds you just accept everything said by minority scientists- most scientists aren't saying the same as this guy, why???

You jumped on me calling him a nut and ignored the points.

Why did people (in the second video) say they saw a plane, multiple people by the way?

Why would a broadcaster, in one the lie, show this apparent giveaway?

Is there ANY other footage of this 'ball'?

That is debate. You put up some evidence and I'm challenging.

Don't discard my argument cause I called your guy a nut. I just watched 45 minutes of BS because you asked me to...

eddie wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Of course they haven't seen it.

They don't even realise how much information we will never know, due to secrecy.

What you will get is a lot of lazy name calling. These people are the useful idiots who allow the elite to get away with mass murder for the sake of global power and riches.

I know they didn't watch it. I knew they wouldn't.
They're frightened, that's all it is, I post these things up - and to date this is the first "science" one I've posted - yet this "scientist" is a "nut"
Why? They dont know. He just is.

Well hitler was a nut, and he was in charge of a whole country and done loads of damage until people realised he was a nut.

Doesn't matter. If the TV says the sun is blue well then, the TV and the government said so....so it just be true.

There is well over an hour of video there eddie - you can't expect people to watch that all in one go, analyse it, refer to other sources, and then come up with a detailed analysis as soon as you want them to. Now I've said I'm watching the first one - a fact which you keep ignoring. Meanwhile, your partner in crime keeps insulting people in this thread, so before you get on your high horse, read his posts properly.

Quite frankly, it's pretty lazy to just post a video anyway eddie. Why don't you break down what the first guy is saying, and explain why you think what he's saying is valid?

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Richard The Lionheart wrote:So zack has never hear people see

Pull that person from the burning building

Pull that person away from the car.

Pull the people back from the building.

When you want to destroy a building the genral termionaology is Bring the nuilding down.

All the examples you gave are of "pulling people".

Larry was clearly referring to pulling a BUILDING. D'UH! HA HA!

Bruv, there's 2 choices - you're either stupid or you're lying.

So there was no fire crews in the buiding then?

Are you that fucking stupid?

I will give you a chance to back out now before I make you look a bigger twat.

Again are you saying both larry and the Fire team had access to explosives?
When did they place them?
Where is the evidence they were complict together?

Now you little Nazi jew hater you have no evidence other than your antisemitism.

Pull mean pull back

It's pathetic tbh. If me or didge or raggs said 'oh wow I'm convinced', Eds would welcome us seeing the light without question. That we challenge what the theorists say means we are blind or stupid. The only way I could get on board with this stuff is if I suspend my ability to approach evidence critically. There is ZERO interest among truthers to question their own 'findings', yet they question everything about the accepted version of events. Nonsense.

Richard The Lionheart wrote:So how many of the videos Eddie have you watched that i have posted that comp0letely refute many of the claims you have made on this?

Zero by any chance?

So before you judge others and claim you think you kn ow something when you only have seen a one sided view and the fact you arew not at ll in the know of some basic science, I think you have a cheek to lay claim on others, when many of us have watched many of this videos and sighed deeply at how bad they are

Please point me to a video that is independent of any government editing or made by the government

Oh and let's not forget the foreknowledge of WTC7 coming down before it fell.....

This will be the last time I ever list vids here though.
Some of you aren't ready to find the truth - whatever that is.

are you saying its absolutely IMPOSSIBLE that we've been lied to?

Raggamuffin wrote:Quite frankly, it's pretty lazy to just post a video anyway eddie. Why don't you break down what the first guy is saying, and explain why you think what he's saying is valid?

Why would I? Watch it and make your own mind up!
Do I ask you to rewrite a news article in your own words? Behave.

eddie wrote:

Richard The Lionheart wrote:So how many of the videos Eddie have you watched that i have posted that comp0letely refute many of the claims you have made on this?

Zero by any chance?

So before you judge others and claim you think you kn ow something when you only have seen a one sided view and the fact you arew not at ll in the know of some basic science, I think you have a cheek to lay claim on others, when many of us have watched many of this videos and sighed deeply at how bad they are

Please point me to a video that is independent of any government editing or made by the government

Oh and let's not forget the foreknowledge of WTC7 coming down before it fell.....

This will be the last time I ever list vids here though.
Some of you aren't ready to find the truth - whatever that is.

are you saying its absolutely IMPOSSIBLE that we've been lied to?

There are the videos and live footage from news crews for a start.

Is it impossible to believe that we've been lied to?

What about Handy Andys saying that Diana was murderd?

In 2005, Dara McQuillan, the spokesperson for Silverstein Properties, gave the following explanation for Silverstein's remarks:

In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building.
Later in the day, the Fire Commander ordered his firefighters out of the building and at 5:20 p.m. the building collapsed. No lives were lost at Seven World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
FDNY firefighter Richard Banaciski told the New York Times,

They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street.

FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro also told the New York Times,

I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people.

Like I say, I can place other people who were there and back the view Pull

Mean pull out

Checkmate to the fucking loons

Eds you just accept everything said by minority scientists- most scientists aren't saying the same as this guy, why???

You jumped on me calling him a nut and ignored the points.

Why did people (in the second video) say they saw a plane, multiple people by the way?

Why would a broadcaster, in one the lie, show this apparent giveaway?

Is there ANY other footage of this 'ball'?

That is debate. You put up some evidence and I'm challenging.

Don't discard my argument cause I called your guy a nut. I just watched 45 minutes of BS because you asked me to...

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Quite frankly, it's pretty lazy to just post a video anyway eddie. Why don't you break down what the first guy is saying, and explain why you think what he's saying is valid?

Why would I? Watch it and make your own mind up!
Do I ask you to rewrite a news article in your own words? Behave.

You want to make a case? You should be prepared to at least summarise what's in the video and say why you think it's valid.

I doubt very much that Zack has watched all three videos, and yet you seem impressed by his posts. Why is that?

Eilzel wrote:It's pathetic tbh. If me or didge or raggs said 'oh wow I'm convinced', Eds would welcome us seeing the light without question. That we challenge what the theorists say means we are blind or stupid. The only way I could get on board with this stuff is if I suspend my ability to approach evidence critically. There is ZERO interest among truthers to question their own 'findings', yet they question everything about the accepted version of events. Nonsense.

Sorry mate i am done trying to reason with people in one case being so naive and the other two is based on trying to put this blame to another nation. Again the man is Jewish ethnnicity and that is the real bases for the claim here

The fire crews all speak of being orderedd to Pull out

I mean what else would pull mean for goodness

Let them pat each other on the back for the worst appeasement ever and basically insulting every last victim of this attack with the bullshit they believe

In fact, I think a few people have introduced other issues, so don't blame everyone for not having watched over an hour of conspiracy theories.

Agreed didge it is tiring. There is a sense of self superior thinking involved with these stories. That they don't like their beliefs being challenged just makes them dogmatic. Zero response to any challenge from you, me or raggs.

So, it's absolutely ok that BBC reported the collapse of building 7 before it collapsed? 

Eilzel wrote:Agreed didge it is tiring. There is a sense of self superior thinking involved with these stories. That they don't like their beliefs being challenged just makes them dogmatic. Zero response to any challenge from you, me or raggs.

What gets me is that many are assumptions to views, which seem odd to an individual, who because they do, then others think the same.
Its bonkers. The worst is they ignore the countless evidence that prove it was Al-Qaeda
Anyway I am done with the 9/11 conspiracy bullshit, as real people died on that day and I cannot stomach people making the worst bullshit and appeasement for the Al-Qaeda terrorists. I really do find it disgusting. What is worst of all, it is not even done from the start as a point of knowing the truth, it is done from an ulterior motive.

This man made me laugh:

TV licence evader refused to pay because the 'BBC covered up facts about 9/11 and claimed tower fell 20 minutes before it did'

• Tony Rooke represented himself at Horsham Magistrates' Court in Sussex
  
• Told inspector on visit in May 2012 that he would not be paying licence fee
  
  
• Rooke said he was withholding fee under Section 15 of Terrorism Act 2000
  
• This states it's an offence for someone to provide funds used for terrorism
  
• He said he didn't want to give money to an organisation 'funding terrorism'
  
• Rooke said BBC claimed World Trade Centre 7 fell 20 minutes before it did
  

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:

Why would I? Watch it and make your own mind up!
Do I ask you to rewrite a news article in your own words? Behave.

You want to make a case? You should be prepared to at least summarise what's in the video and say why you think it's valid.

I doubt very much that Zack has watched all three videos, and yet you seem impressed by his posts. Why is that?

I did watch all 3. I needed some entertainment while cycling/cardio last night.

I'm not saying I agree with all of it either - I would want to corroborate his data (esp regarding angles of impact, which he clearly did on Google sketch up, so I would love to download that file).

But that's kind of the point. There are many crucial holes in the official version of events which can not be explained off as mere conspiracy theories.

And Eddie - you'll find interesting stuff about the Rothschild's too.

As I said, look up Niall Fergusons work on this. He's a highly respected historian.

Re this "ball" issue, it's down to the quality of the video isn't it? Even the little boats look like "balls" or blobs.

Yeah that has to be one of the daffest theories that the BBC was in on 9/11 and was ordered as part of the plan to say a building had come down before it had come down.
Of course most rational people know that many things were claimed that day and many reports were made in error which generally happens in such a traumatic event.
It happens time and again in such situations that many people get aspects of events wrong.
This is normal, but to the conspiracy loon, its somehow damning evidence.


err clearly not

The fact the massive amount of damning evidence proving exactly who did this and how they did this is overwhelming, but the so called truthers arfe nolt actually interested in the truth.

Again more evidence of antisemitism, now in regards to the Rothschild family:








Conspiracy theories
Mind-bogglingly rich Jewish bankers who funded wars and had a multinational network all the way back in the 18th century? Ripe for conspiracy theorizing!
Conspiracy theories about the family have been around for over a century. Usually, the main accusation made by theorists is that they're playing both sides of every conflict, ever. The Napoleonic Wars, the Franco-Prussian War, World War I, World War II, etc. All sides of each war were merely puppets of the Rothschilds, who would make exorbitant amounts of cash from repeatedly prodding nations into a cycle of endless warfare.
The modern Rothschild conspiracy theories started with the Nazis. Erich Waschneck made the film Die Rothschilds^[wp] (international title The Rothschilds' Shares in Waterloo) which portrays the Rothschild family as profiting hugely from the Napoleonic wars. The film ends with a burning Star of David over a map of Europe, because the Nazis were all about the subtle allusion.
Alex Jones, Lyndon LaRouche, and many other conspiracy theorists view the Rothschilds as helping to create the framework for the New World Order. Their name often gets attached to any old NWO, Illuminati, or one world government theory.
This, of course, is nonsense. While the Rothschilds did make money by financing arms deals, they also had tons of money in bond markets. Political instability was bad for business because it would destabilize the bond markets. After the Franco-Prussian war, Prussia imposed demands for extremely harsh reparations on France. The Rothschilds, not wanting France to go bankrupt and declare war on Prussia, swooped in and bailed out the entire country with the help of other investors. During World War II, Adolf Hitler seized the Rothschilds' property and drove them from Germany — pretty sneaky, considering Hitler was supposed to be their puppet. In reality, the power of the family went into decline by World War I as American Wall Street based financiers began to overtake them.
Of course, in conspiracy-land, the ascendancy of the Wall Street firms was all part of the plan. The first step was in creating the Federal Reserve to concentrate power in their hands even further, so they would own the US as well as Europe. Then they took over the UN, they own the World Bank and IMF, all of it. They are the puppetmasters, and we are their puppets.
Back in reality, the Rothschilds aren't guilty of anything besides some dirty financial games and being obscenely rich, assuming you think being obscenely rich is something to be guilty about. They also do great wine (and fund the odd website).



http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rothschild_family


Amasing how some are going off conspiracies the Nazis created

Right time to leave the conspiracy nutballs to themselves

Here's the first inaccurate thing that the guy says in the first video:

"Note that no plane is seen in any of NBC's live images". (3.52).

That's not true. It's true that the camera switches just before the impact, but the live film does show an object approaching the south tower, and it's probably a plane. In any case, I think he's claiming that the object was put in afterwards, and that's clearly not the case.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtZKEjr-Sfg (9.35)

Eddie - please note that I said to look up the work of Niall Ferguson on The House of Rothschild.

I didn't mention a single (not one, nothing about Nazis, etc) conspiracy theory.

Yet some are so utterly desperate that they provide you with misinformation in an attempt to discredit.

Which is why I specifically mentioned a highly respected historian like Ferguson.

You can also see his documentary on YouTube, called the Ascent of Money. He may also have other documentaries on 4OD (channel 4 online).

Now excuse me while I chuckle at the desperation of other posters. ;-)

Eddie, have you checked the footage which this guy has selected against the original footage, or are you just accepting what he says without question? If you haven't checked the original footage, you're just as bad as the people you're pointing the finger at.

I'm off to look for the original footage from Fox News, as the guy claims that it was faked.

You certainly have before Zack and you and sexy have been exposed for the pathetic little Nazis that you are.

It was easy to do so, even though you have both openly stated you only believe in a one state solution, which does not include Israel, based of course on religious babble.

Now I understand the EU is looking very much into denying the state of Israel, as very much antisemitism. Its about time they stamped down on you racists

Laters

Richard The Lionheart wrote:You certainly have before Zack and you and sexy have been exposed for the pathetic little Nazis that you are.

It was easy to do so, even though you have both openly stated you only believe in a one state solution, which does not include Israel, based of course on religious babble.

Now I understand the EU is looking very much into denying the state of Israel, as very much antisemitism. Its about time they stamped down on you racists

Laters

You made a preemptive attack on my posts which just demonstrates how desperate you are.

Now you're attacking someone who used to be your friend. Shame on you.

Bruv, when even Smelly thinks you've become the new Smelly Bandit, you really should ask yourself a few questions. Lol!

Laters dude. I hope you manage to get rid of the ants in your pants.

I'm now looking at WNWY news - which is something to do with Fox News apparently (?). Anyway, this does show the second plane going into the south tower. The guy in the conspiracy video says that it's fake because you can see the nose of the plane come out the other side. Is it completely impossible for that to have happened?

[quote="Raggamuffin"]Here's the first inaccurate thing that the guy says in the first video:

"Note that no plane is seen in any of NBC's live images". (3.52).

That's not true. It's true that the camera switches just before the impact, but the live film does show an object approaching the south tower, and it's probably a plane. In any case, I think he's claiming that the object was put in afterwards, and that's clearly not the case.  



just had t fix it sorry

Meh...I think these were 757's, powered by two Pratt & Whitney engines, capable of developing 38,200 pounds-force (170 kN) thrust. I don't actually know, but smashing into a glass-mostly building would, I think, result in the nose coming out the other side.

Anyway, that doesn't surprise me.

Original Quill wrote:Meh...I think these were 757's, powered by two Pratt & Whitney engines, capable of developing 38,200 pounds-force (170 kN) thrust.  I don't actually know, but smashing into a glass-mostly building would, I think, result in the nose coming out the other side.

Anyway, that doesn't surprise me.

Me neither. In addition to that, the guy claims that it's fake because ... um ... something to do with a layer mask whereby the nose then disappears and the image faded to black. I can't put it into the right words tbh.

If that really happened, that would mean that people were not watching it live obviously, and that what was presented as live footage was actually footage which had been edited and inserted into the live feed. Wouldn't people have noticed if that had happened?

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Richard The Lionheart wrote:You certainly have before Zack and you and sexy have been exposed for the pathetic little Nazis that you are.

It was easy to do so, even though you have both openly stated you only believe in a one state solution, which does not include Israel, based of course on religious babble.

Now I understand the EU is looking very much into denying the state of Israel, as very much antisemitism. Its about time they stamped down on you racists

Laters

You made a preemptive attack on my posts which just demonstrates how desperate you are.

Now you're attacking someone who used to be your friend. Shame on you.

Bruv, when even Smelly thinks you've become the new Smelly Bandit, you really should ask yourself a few questions. Lol!

Laters dude. I hope you manage to get rid of the ants in your pants.

Please spare me the guilt trip claptrap, she plays off want Jews to be killed based on one of the worst events in history the holocaust. You being exposed for denying Jewish identity, so I will from now on treat two very decietful people who claimed to be so called nice mopderate Muslims, when as seen you both hold very extremist hateful views. Anywone who tries to justify the hate you have based off something as insignificant as Zionism, which is the call for a historical homeland, of which each of you deny, is fundementally racist. Even worse how she deligitmize Israeli citizens as being jsutified to be attacked. That is backing murder through terrorism or a war crime. So its called being disgusted with the pair of you that you claimed to be all moderate, which is an uitter sham. Smelly is far right. Islam teaches and views non-Muslims as inferior and the fact you try to justify your racism, places you far closer to his views and more so sexy, off her disgusting hitler commengts.

So best you get used to the contemt you both throughly deserve.

I really cannot abide rascists and even worse when you have both tries to decieve people.

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm now looking at WNWY news - which is something to do with Fox News apparently (?). Anyway, this does show the second plane going into the south tower. The guy in the conspiracy video says that it's fake because you can see the nose of the plane come out the other side. Is it completely impossible for that to have happened?

hears a still from raggs video ,
you can clearly see the planes nose
notice that its NOT in the center of the building rather to one side far to one side clipping it in essence





So the fact the nose came out the "other side" is hardly surprising  given how these buildings are constructed with a "central core " supporting a steel/concrete lattice  
100 tones x say 500 miles and hour=50000 tones of force



Edit and i should ad i originally saw this footage raggs has provided

LIVE on the day on a 10ft wide screen

So is this guy actually claiming that an actual ball of some kind went into the south tower?

korban dallas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm now looking at WNWY news - which is something to do with Fox News apparently (?). Anyway, this does show the second plane going into the south tower. The guy in the conspiracy video says that it's fake because you can see the nose of the plane come out the other side. Is it completely impossible for that to have happened?

hears a still from raggs video ,
you can clearly see the planes nose
notice that its NOT in the center of the building rather to one side far to one side clipping it in essence





So the fact the nose came out the "other side" is hardly surprising  given how these buildings are constructed with a "central core " supporting a steel/concrete lattice  
100 tones x say 500 miles and hour=50000 tones of force

So you think that it's perfectly feasible that the nose of the plane came out of the tower before the plane exploded?

Raggamuffin wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
hears a still from raggs video ,
you can clearly see the planes nose
notice that its NOT in the center of the building rather to one side far to one side clipping it in essence





So the fact the nose came out the "other side" is hardly surprising  given how these buildings are constructed with a "central core " supporting a steel/concrete lattice  
100 tones x say 500 miles and hour=50000 tones of force

So you think that it's perfectly feasible that the nose of the plane came out of the tower before the plane exploded?

Totally
Especially as thats what happened ? dont you

korban dallas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So you think that it's perfectly feasible that the nose of the plane came out of the tower before the plane exploded?

Totally
Especially as thats what happened ? dont you  

I don't have a problem with it. I'm not sure about the other claim about the nose hitting the "layer limit". However, I can't slow down the video enough to see if that's what happened.

I'm just giving this video and this conspiracy guy a fair chance - like eddie asked.

Raggamuffin wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
Totally
Especially as thats what happened ? dont you  

I don't have a problem with it. I'm not sure about the other claim about the nose hitting the "layer limit". However, I can't slow down the video enough to see if that's what happened.

I'm just giving this video and this conspiracy guy a fair chance - like eddie asked.

I know you don`t have a problem with it

Use space bar for frame by frame quick double tapp


http://debunkingnoplanes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/the-lies-of-ace-baker.html

OK, so this guy thinks that the object which hit the south tower was a top secret, remote controlled, anti-gravity, propelled drone, and that 9/11 was an inside job orchestrated by American and Israeli intelligence agencies.

Now I wasn't watching live footage when the second plane allegedly hit the south tower, I only watched footage of it later on. There was live footage of the second plane at the time though, was there not? That would mean that the "ball" hit the south tower earlier than was claimed, and that the news channels edited the "ball" to look like a plane and then put the footage out there whilst claiming it was live.

Does that make any sense to anyone whatsoever?

korban dallas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't have a problem with it. I'm not sure about the other claim about the nose hitting the "layer limit". However, I can't slow down the video enough to see if that's what happened.

I'm just giving this video and this conspiracy guy a fair chance - like eddie asked.

I know you don`t have a problem with it

Use space bar for frame by frame quick double tapp


http://debunkingnoplanes.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/the-lies-of-ace-baker.html

Thanks for the tip. I might need some practise at that - I can't stop it at the exact moment.

Has eddie gone? I've now watched the first video and commented on it, so it would be interesting to see her comments on what I've said.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:And Eddie - you'll find interesting stuff about the Rothschild's too.

As I said, look up Niall Fergusons work on this. He's a highly respected historian.

Thanks I'll take a look. I know about the stories surrounding the Rothschilds but don't know enough.

There are enough holes, as you say, to make a tennis racket out of the official story.

I'm now watching the second video. In this video the guy claims that Aaron Russo claimed that Nicholas Rockefeller told him 11 months before 9/11 that there would be an event after which the US would go into Afghanistan, Iraq, and do some other stuff.

Obviously I've checked this out, so here is a video of Aaron Russo making these claims. The problem is that he doesn't seem to have told anyone else before 9/11 what Nicholas Rockefeller allegedly said. The other problem is that Aaron Russo died in 2007, so nobody can ask him about it any more.

So the second video is a bit of a mish-mash of different theories. The theory of the "ball" is included, but there's also footage of people saying it was a plane but not a commercial plane, that it was a military plane, a drone, and one guy saying it was a fighter jet - all stuff I've seen before really.

In the third video there are claims that no planes hit the towers, but I'm really not sure what the alternative explanation is, and I haven't watched it all the way through.

I see that eddie has apparently lost interest in all three videos and a discussion of them anyway.

It's tiring
Everyone asking questions that have been explained in the video already - which is why I put it up?
Secondly, the people who appear in the video have given the reasons why they think and can see it wasn't a plane, why do I need to reiterate what they're saying?
Thirdly, ive come to realise when I'm beating my head against a wall when I sigh and raise my eyes that people have to ask questions that they only need to use their imagination for, to find answers.

"If it wasn't a plane, why did some people see one?"

Think about it.

"Wouldn't people notice if they were seeing different footage to what they witnessed?"

Use your imagination! Why might that happen?

I'm bored rags. I think that it's possible that we were lied to, millions of people think that too, not just little men in rooms, people with BRAINS, experience, knowledge of planes and buildings

Quill says: "the building was mostly glass"
Was it? No. Believe me? Look it up. I'm not here to walk you all through this - it's all there.

There are conspiracy theories about this: and the official story is definitely own of them.

Seriously, I'm bored. There's no real debate on here because my science guy isn't "a real one" - ever.
Ever notice that happen in most threads? "My professional is better than yours!"
When you hear that you know it's time to get out of the debate.
I'd rather go somewhere else, where I'm actually talking to open minds - and no, not everyone agrees, but they're "open" - I find some of the theories stupid or a bit "huh?" but my mind is open.
Always open.
And they don't ask stupid questions.

Oh and one last thing: there's a theory out there that reptilians are at the centre of the earth and they're a new breed of power (or something) and you know what? I don't believe that, I don't think that's true but you know what?
I didn't know that for sure, so I say "could be....? I'll remain open to it. If it's not proven in my lifetime then so be it"


I always say: unless you're there, how do you know anything for sure.

eddie wrote:It's tiring
Everyone asking questions that have been explained in the video already - which is why I put it up?
Secondly, the people who appear in the video have given the reasons why they think and can see it wasn't a plane, why do I need to reiterate what they're saying?
Thirdly, ive come to realise when I'm beating my head against a wall when I sigh and raise my eyes that people have to ask questions that they only need to use their imagination for, to find answers.

"If it wasn't a plane, why did some people see one?"

Think about it.

"Wouldn't people notice if they were seeing different footage to what they witnessed?"

Use your imagination! Why might that happen?

I'm bored rags. I think that it's possible that we were lied to, millions of people think that too, not just little men in rooms, people with BRAINS, experience, knowledge of planes and buildings

Quill says: "the building was mostly glass"
Was it? No. Believe me? Look it up. I'm not here to walk you all through this - it's all there.

There are conspiracy theories about this: and the official story is definitely own of them.

Seriously, I'm bored. There's no real debate on here because my science guy isn't "a real one" - ever.
Ever notice that happen in most threads?  "My professional is better than yours!"
When you hear that you know it's time to get out of the debate.
I'd rather go somewhere else, where I'm actually talking to open minds - and no, not everyone agrees, but they're "open" - I find some of the theories stupid or a bit "huh?" but my mind is open.
Always open.
And they don't ask stupid questions.

Oh and one last thing: there's a theory out there that reptilians are at the centre of the earth and they're a new breed of power (or something) and you know what? I don't believe that, I don't think that's true but you know what?
I didn't know that for sure, so I say "could be....? I'll remain open to it. If it's not proven in my lifetime then so be it"


I always say: unless you're there, how do you know anything for sure.

I don't have a problem discussing these conspiracy theories, and you said you wanted to discuss them with people who had watched the videos. Well I've watched 2.5 of those 3 videos, and I have raised some points, so do you want to discuss them or not?

I know it's tiring - it's tiring watching an hour of conspiracy theories and checking out what they're saying, but I did it as you requested.

Re this "ball" theory, wouldn't that be a bit risky? I mean - anyone could have looked up and seen a ball flying through the air rather than a plane.

Re the News channels - wouldn't all that mean that they were in cahoots with whoever arranged this "ball" thing? Do you really think they would all go along with it, and deliberately pretend that the attack on the second tower at least happened later than it actually did?

So which bits of the videos do you actually agree with eddie? Do you think it was a "ball" sent by the American/Israeli intelligence services? Do you think it was a plane but not a commercial plane as reported? Do you think Aaron Russo was telling the truth about Nicholas Rockefeller, whoever he is?

eddie wrote:It's tiring
Everyone asking questions that have been explained in the video already - which is why I put it up?
Secondly, the people who appear in the video have given the reasons why they think and can see it wasn't a plane, why do I need to reiterate what they're saying?
Thirdly, ive come to realise when I'm beating my head against a wall when I sigh and raise my eyes that people have to ask questions that they only need to use their imagination for, to find answers.

"If it wasn't a plane, why did some people see one?"

Think about it.

"Wouldn't people notice if they were seeing different footage to what they witnessed?"

Use your imagination! Why might that happen?

I'm bored rags. I think that it's possible that we were lied to, millions of people think that too, not just little men in rooms, people with BRAINS, experience, knowledge of planes and buildings

Quill says: "the building was mostly glass"
Was it? No. Believe me? Look it up. I'm not here to walk you all through this - it's all there.

There are conspiracy theories about this: and the official story is definitely own of them.

Seriously, I'm bored. There's no real debate on here because my science guy isn't "a real one" - ever.
Ever notice that happen in most threads?  "My professional is better than yours!"
When you hear that you know it's time to get out of the debate.
I'd rather go somewhere else, where I'm actually talking to open minds - and no, not everyone agrees, but they're "open" - I find some of the theories stupid or a bit "huh?" but my mind is open.
Always open.
And they don't ask stupid questions.

Oh and one last thing: there's a theory out there that reptilians are at the centre of the earth and they're a new breed of power (or something) and you know what? I don't believe that, I don't think that's true but you know what?
I didn't know that for sure, so I say "could be....? I'll remain open to it. If it's not proven in my lifetime then so be it"


I always say: unless you're there, how do you know anything for sure.

I am so with you on that!  For example, the plane going all the way through the building and the nose coming out the other side undamaged.  Why would anyone not understand that that isn't possible?  Why would they want that explained to them?  Just makes me want to shake them!