- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Tucker Goes There With WTC Building 7 Discussion
Posted on 5/1/23 at 4:38 pm to thermal9221
Posted on 5/1/23 at 4:38 pm to thermal9221
quote:
thermal9221
I'm curious to why you are so defensive of the accepted narrative. You are doing exactly what Tucker described in the video when subjects like 911 (or JFK) are broached.
Why are you so close minded? What are you afraid of?
2
Posted on 5/1/23 at 4:41 pm to GumboPot
quote:Okay GP, what's the "both" theory?quote:Why not both?
Uhh yeah I’m gonna go with a jet crashing into a huge building causing massive fire aiding in the collapse of the two towers as the explanation.
Posted on 5/1/23 at 4:45 pm to GumboPot
quote:As someone who finds 9/11 virtually unquestionable, and JFK virtually implausible, and as someone who respects your opinion, I'd like to hear your case for 9/11.
subjects like 911 (or JFK) are broached.
Why are you so close minded? What are you afraid of?
Posted on 5/1/23 at 4:55 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
I'd like to hear your case for 9/11.
I just don't believe these 767 could have knocked these buildings down. In fact they didn't.
Angle calls out absurdity of Bažant’s hasty “pile driver” theory
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:00 pm to GumboPot
I’m not defensive, I’m just not a sucker for clear as day shite.
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:10 pm to GumboPot
quote:I understand.
I just don't believe these 767 could have knocked these buildings down.
My dad, who is a fairly accomplished engineer, says there is zero question that jets loaded with fuel could have brought the towers down. He says it's damn fortunate the planes couldn't access the towers at a lower level, because the lower the strike, the greater the chance of the towers toppling instead of coming straight down.
Consider this, how many survivors from above the strike levels were there?
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:12 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
He says it's damn fortunate the planes couldn't access the towers at a lower level, because the lower the strike, the greater the chance of the towers toppling instead of coming straight down.
I’m honestly shocked that they stayed up as long as they did, definitely saved many lives for sure.
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:15 pm to Timeoday
Shocking that anyone would add a terrorism clause when the WTC had already been attacked once and the same people vowed to do it again.
Or is it just prudent thinking?
Or is it just prudent thinking?
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:15 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
My dad, who is a fairly accomplished engineer, says there is zero question that jets loaded with fuel could have brought the towers down. He says it's damn fortunate the planes couldn't access the towers at a lower level, because the lower the strike, the greater the chance of the towers toppling instead of coming straight down.
Nice, what does he say about building 7?
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:21 pm to NC_Tigah
Fact: A 767 could NOT 'knock down' either WTC 1 or 2.
Because they collapsed from the inside.
And yes, the 2nd building hit was the 1st to fall.
Why?
Because it was struck lower than the 1st building. Thus more weight on the impact site.
Because they collapsed from the inside.
And yes, the 2nd building hit was the 1st to fall.
Why?
Because it was struck lower than the 1st building. Thus more weight on the impact site.
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:29 pm to Westbank111
Exactly! Sad that there are so many still drinking up the government Kool aid.
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:48 pm to NC_Tigah
My mother, who is a metallurgist, says the fuel and fires could not burn hot enough to affect the metal structure of the building.
".... there is no mechanism to explain the collapse of the lower portion of the building, which was undamaged by fire."
Oops
"Most expositions of collapse theories invoke the "tremendous energy" of falling mass impacting the floors below to explain the thorough destruction of the Towers. Yet the seismic records clearly show that the vast majority of this mass did not participate in the destruction of the Towers since it evidently did not encounter substantial resistance to its descent until it reached the ground."
Oops 2
".... there is no mechanism to explain the collapse of the lower portion of the building, which was undamaged by fire."
Oops
"Most expositions of collapse theories invoke the "tremendous energy" of falling mass impacting the floors below to explain the thorough destruction of the Towers. Yet the seismic records clearly show that the vast majority of this mass did not participate in the destruction of the Towers since it evidently did not encounter substantial resistance to its descent until it reached the ground."
Oops 2
This post was edited on 5/1/23 at 6:27 pm
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:56 pm to Timeoday
Jesus
You’re like a kid.
Tell your mom I said she’s an idiot.
You’re like a kid.
Tell your mom I said she’s an idiot.
Posted on 5/1/23 at 5:58 pm to Schleynole
quote:
How much credibility does the gment have?
The government didn’t tell me what happened.
Posted on 5/1/23 at 6:18 pm to SixthAndBarone
quote:
The government blew up the buildings in correlation with the Arabs hijacking the planes and flying them into the building. Why?
Are you familiar with the Patriot Act?
Posted on 5/1/23 at 6:21 pm to Schleynole
quote:
On 9-11 it was said over the radio and on TV...
Case closed, huh?
Posted on 5/1/23 at 6:28 pm to thermal9221
quote:
Jesus that video is fake.
Do you believe in dog people too?
Yes, biden hired one thats steals womens luggage.
Posted on 5/1/23 at 6:39 pm to 2020_reVISION
We have had these debates so many times. Am I the only one to have worked in WTC 1, 92 floor, when I was doing air monitoring work for the asbestos companies, in 1987?
They were filled with asbestos and would have cost many billions of dollars to abate?
The outer skin, I saw in person was designed to endure just such an incident, involving large airliners.
I won't waste my time trying to explain how these aluminum craft could not have done what we have been told.
Look at the pictures, where even the wingtips punctured through the beautiful steel lattice outer skin.
I know even as a 27-year-old junior consultant what I saw.
Follow the money. Always about the money and power,
They were filled with asbestos and would have cost many billions of dollars to abate?
The outer skin, I saw in person was designed to endure just such an incident, involving large airliners.
I won't waste my time trying to explain how these aluminum craft could not have done what we have been told.
Look at the pictures, where even the wingtips punctured through the beautiful steel lattice outer skin.
I know even as a 27-year-old junior consultant what I saw.
Follow the money. Always about the money and power,
This post was edited on 5/1/23 at 6:44 pm
Posted on 5/1/23 at 6:47 pm to thermal9221
quote:
The government didn’t tell me what happened.
Of course it did
Posted on 5/1/23 at 6:51 pm to GumboPot
quote:
I just don't believe these 767 could have knocked these buildings down. In fact they didn't.
Instant proof that you’re a dumbass.
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News