From your perspective, yes. From other peoples perspective the opposite is true. Can you tell me which is more valid without somehow claiming your perspective is superior?
It's still not quite right scott, for example:
How comes it's always "The Government" that is responsible? Crooks, Conmen and other assorted navvies know full well that the ones that manage to get away with it the most are those that "Infiltrate the System". This means you can have such crooks in the Government and the Police that aren't actually working on the authority of the Government but as their own Crime Gang.
In fact this was one of the points in the JFK Assassination, some thought that it was setup internally "By the Government". However there were people in Government jobs known to be in societies (That incidentally weren't secret) that often stated that their president of the time as "a N****r loving commy pinko" (That's of course paraphrased)
You just have to look to World Events or Politics and you'll often see there are people that openly don't like "Who" is in government and they might well grind their axes while in a government job.
A conspiracy involving a government, usually means the government has actually be left out.
Sorry but the hammers dropped Scottx.
These threads have been done and done again and if anything it's chased legitimate members away from the forum because of how intolerable they've become. If you want 9/11 as a pet subject, I'd really suggest getting yourself a website to house a forum for your rantings and invite others to participate over there.
This basically means 9/11 threads are an Autolock now, you've had your fun, leave the floor open for someone else.
Oops, wrong.Anyone who has researched this topic to the degree I have will tell you that fire does not melt steel.
I voted #6. I don't know anything about the secret society part. But it was definitely planned and executed by corrupt government officials.
Scott, if you can't get pro-science people on your side, then that is a sure-fire indiciation that you have nothing.
Anyone who has researched this topic to the degree I have will tell you that fire does not melt steel. The emperor is wearing no clothes. What happened on 9/11 was repeated so many times from that very instant, it is now a mantra and a myth. That some people wish to call a spade a spade and should be disallowed in any venue among freedom and liberty loving people of the world, is an Orwellian nightmare I'm afraid to see my son growing up to witness.
Originally Posted by scott3x
I don't really think the muslim part is so important.. seriously, if they can kill their own people, I don't really think any conventional ideas of religion would apply; but the resources, yes, I would definitely agree with that part.
I can't respond to your post as my response has been deleted by a mod, most likely Skinwalker. You would think that he would accept it as this is pseudoscience subforum.
I basically stated that I believe Islam is the solution to the problem. Therefore in discussing the problem, we should discuss the solution.
DiamondHearts said:I basically stated that I believe Islam is the solution.
No, the solution to the world's problems is for the religious to grow up, and abandon their childish beliefs.
I cannot response as my views will be censored. I can only say that if you believe religion is the main problem, then you are sadly mistaken. The Western elite use religion, just as they use other tools to dominate the world.
Atheism is the end result of materialism and capitalism. It is the thing farthest from the actual truth.
DiamondHearts said:With this, I suggest we get back to the actual topic.
Also in the UK: the point being, it was done for a joke not for religious purposes.If memory serves, many people in a canadian survey, when asked what their religion was, responded "Jedi" ;-).
"Picard" would say whatever the script writers felt was appropriate.Captain Jean Luc Picard, Captain of the Star Trek Enterprise in TNG never said he believed in God as far as I know
Pity there isn't the option in reporting of "being a fruitcake".
He's proof?
Nah, an idiot.
Oli said:The Esotericist said:Anyone who has researched this topic to the degree I have will tell you that fire does not melt steel.
Oops, wrong.
Try more research, instead of speculation.
Actually it was an observation: Stryder had stated his reasons and The Esotericist had dismissed them completely, going so far as to accuse Stryder of being some sort of disinformation agent, and then claiming that he himself (The Esotericist) was "the proof".Oli, if anyone should be getting reported here, it's you; it's obvious you're engaging in a personal attack.
None on this particular issue, I am however aware of the thermal properties steel and how its mechanical properties vary with temperature.Oli, I must admit I'm curious as to how much research you yourself have done on the issue.
scott3x said:Oli, if anyone should be getting reported here, it's you; it's obvious you're engaging in a personal attack.
Actually it was an observation: Stryder had stated his reasons and The Esotericist had dismissed them completely, going so far as to accuse Stryder of being some sort of disinformation agent, and then claiming that he himself (The Esotericist) was "the proof". In other words, The Esotericist started the personal (and unfounded) attacks. Perhaps you should berate him?
Oli said:scott3x said:Oli, I must admit I'm curious as to how much research you yourself have done on the issue.
None on this particular issue, I am however aware of the thermal properties of steel and how its mechanical properties vary with temperature. All basic engineering information.
Scott3x I took a look at the website to which you provided a link. On that page it uses the term pyroclastic flow. Any idea why they use that term?
scott3x said:If memory serves, many people in a canadian survey, when asked what their religion was, responded "Jedi" ;-).
Also in the UK: the point being, it was done for a joke not for religious purposes. A point which seems to have gone over your head.
Oli said:scott3x said:Captain Jean Luc Picard, Captain of the Star Trek Enterprise in TNG never said he believed in God as far as I know
"Picard" would say whatever the script writers felt was appropriate.
"His" opinion has no bearing whatsoever on anything.
TE also stated "Anyone who has researched this topic to the degree I have will tell you that fire does not melt steel."What you're doing now is an observation. What you did before was a personal attack. TE only stated that he thought it was "very possible" that Stryder was a "government or NWO plant"; he also gave his reasons for his theorizing that this might be the case.
And the last time I offered my services I was accused of "being vague" (not by you) when I listed some of the pertinent factors that would need to be known.If memory serves, you're an engineer, right? I view this as a very good thing; I think we can all agree that what is needed here is more people who have a good understanding of engineering, atleast when it comes to the collapsing of buildings.
As I've said before, I have no particular interest in 911, I do however object to posts containing blatant idiocy from people claiming to have "researched" a subject.In any case, there is a site of architects and engineers who would like the investigation of the cause of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 reopened; they have stated their reasons on said site; perhaps you could take a look to see if they've made any mistakes? It's on the right hand side of the page:
http://www.ae911truth.org/
No, it was all humour - it was an internet meme that caught on with the geek population.Perhaps there was some humour in it
Star Trek and Star Wars have very little to do with science: many is the time that science has been over-ridden by plot requirements.Again Oli, especially when dealing with people who like science (and who have discussed both Star Wars and Star Trek for a very long time), what characters like Jean Luc Picard has said actually does have merit.
scott3x said:What you're doing now is an observation. What you did before was a personal attack. TE only stated that he thought it was "very possible" that Stryder was a "government or NWO plant"; he also gave his reasons for his theorizing that this might be the case.
TE also stated "Anyone who has researched this topic to the degree I have will tell you that fire does not melt steel." Since that is incorrect he's either a liar (about his "research") or an idiot, I merely thought that "liar" was more offensive and therefore didn't use it, but either will do as an observation.
Oli said:scott3x said:If memory serves, you're an engineer, right? I view this as a very good thing; I think we can all agree that what is needed here is more people who have a good understanding of engineering, atleast when it comes to the collapsing of buildings.
And the last time I offered my services I was accused of "being vague" (not by you) when I listed some of the pertinent factors that would need to be known.
Oli said:The last thing I need is know-nothings deciding that being comprehensive is somehow skirting the issue: if I weren't comprehensive in real life then half of my projects would be in pieces on the ground by now.
Oli said:scott3x said:In any case, there is a site of architects and engineers who would like the investigation of the cause of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 reopened; they have stated their reasons on said site; perhaps you could take a look to see if they've made any mistakes? It's on the right hand side of the page:
http://www.ae911truth.org/
As I've said before, I have no particular interest in 911