Fresh perspective on 9/11

[dave52]

Originally Posted by wispy

But they can.

By the pile-driver of dust...?

[wispy]

Originally Posted by dave52

By the pile-driver of dust...?

But of course. You beleive in some of this planet DEW and dustification technology which has no evidence to back it up apart from some vague misinterpreted, or deliberately skewed, observation.

You last post about USSS starships evidences this.


TBH I hadn't heard about these until you posted it but doing a bit of googling it seems to stem from McKinnon who hacked into US Govt computers and purportedly found evidence of the ships log.

But there's no actual evidence is there? Just some internet theory hearesay.

But you beleive this rather what NIST and the majority of experts are saying.

[randomjoe]

Like I said, it might not be the case, BUT it does explain a few things that straightforward explosives doesn't.

And as for the US government's ability to develop technology whilst keeping it from the public, its quite simple. They can, and they do.

For example:

U.F.O DISCLOSURE PROJECT -FULL VERSION - YouTube

U.F.O DISCLOSURE PROJECT -FULL VERSION - YouTube

I'm referring to the zero-point energy that they developed from reverse engineering ET technology.

And as for why they don't just fry those countries, I would say because they are more useful to the US as they are. They're not actually doing the US any harm as they are. The US always needs an enemy to frighten people into giving up their rights, and it allows the vested interests to make lots of money from conventional weapons.

As I say, I could be wrong, but please someone explain to me how just explosives could cause almost everything to turn to dust. No-one's explained that yet.

[labouysse]

Originally Posted by dave52

By the pile-driver of dust...?

The dust obscures the huge amount falling steel, concrete etc which was clearly found within the footprint of the towers at ground zero.

ground zero - Google Search

ground zero - Google Search

[labouysse]

Originally Posted by randomjoe

As I say, I could be wrong, but please someone explain to me how just explosives could cause almost everything to turn to dust. No-one's explained that yet.

Everything didn't turn to dust.

Easy.

[rosie789]

Originally Posted by tenzingnorgay

Unicorns used to exist and the earth may be hollow.

I have read about hollow earth theory and it seems to have one major flaw. If what they're saying is correct then shouldn't the earth be a donut? It spins about an axis. It has been hit by many meteors in its history and is not a perfect sphere. It is also rather big :/ so really a hollow earth would be very prone to collapsing into a smaller planet, and that's if it were able to form in the first place.

So yeah, if this is comparable to 9/11 'truth' then we have a problem.

[randomjoe]

Originally Posted by labouysse

Everything didn't turn to dust.

Easy.

I didn't say everything.

I said almost everything.

When the Twin Towers came down, there was only 20 storeys worth of rubble.

If there had been much more than that, the dike or 'slurry wall' would have been seriously damaged and the area around the WTC and the subways would have been flooded.

[randomjoe]

And if it was just controlled demolition, then why don't all buildings that are demolished turn to dust like that? Obviously there's always some dust, but never, ever that much.

[denton]

Originally Posted by randomjoe

I didn't say everything.

I said almost everything.

When the Twin Towers came down, there was only 20 storeys worth of rubble.

If there had been much more than that, the dike or 'slurry wall' would have been seriously damaged and the area around the WTC and the subways would have been flooded.

Twenty stories of rubble would he almost 20% of the total building height. Given that what, 90-95% of the building was empty space, I'd say twenty stories of rubble is being very generous.

[hr360]

Why do some people believe they know everything about a government's secret technology ?

I see people posting things like, " there is no technology capable of doing what you're saying.. ", but nobody on this forum actually knows what our government's technology is capable of.

My mind is open to the probability that government / military technology is many years ahead of what civilians use on a day to day basis. It's logical really.

[denton]

Originally Posted by hr360

Why do some people believe they know everything about a government's secret technology ?

I see people posting things like, " there is no technology capable of doing what you're saying.. ", but nobody on this forum actually knows what our government's technology is capable of.

My mind is open to the probability that government / military technology is many years ahead of what civilians use on a day to day basis. It's logical really.

Same argument can be pointed in both directions. Why do the 'truthers' seem so adamant they're correct? Way I see it; only one side of this point relies on substantiated evidence.

[hr360]

Originally Posted by denton

Same argument can be pointed in both directions. Why do the 'truthers' seem so adamant they're correct? Way I see it; only one side of this point relies on substantiated evidence.

After reading some threads on this forum, some of the " truthers " are rabid and ridiculous sometimes, but so are some of the self proclaimed " logical " people with supporting evidence.

[denton]

Originally Posted by hr360

After reading some threads on this forum, some of the " truthers " are rabid and ridiculous sometimes, but so are some of the self proclaimed " logical " people with supporting evidence.

I'd agree with that.