Comments on: 9/11 Troofers are Idiots

By: ChrisNewYork

ChrisNewYork — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 06:20:24 +0000

9/11 Commissioners Lee Hamilton & Thomas Kean “Commission was set up to fail”
Thomas Kean(Chairman)and Lee H. Hamilton(Vice Chairman)say? that. That link to a movie posted by” Geekengineer”. Building on the video is i believe block of flats( they build a lot of them in Poland in 70s 80s)…. those buildings are a mess… even an explosion from a SMALL propane container could demolish half of the block. There is a reason why high rise buildings have a structural frame. Tractors on this video pulled Carrier wall( im not sure if this is correct name for that part of structure- English is not my first language.) Thats why building collapsed like that, in high rise buildings steel frame is an carrier element. To accomplish have the same effect in wtc1 and 2 and 7 steel frame had to be destroyed.

By: ChrisNewYork

ChrisNewYork — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:23:33 +0000

” 9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out”

50 top experts in their fields — high-rise architects, structural engineers, physicists, chemical engineers, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, controlled demolition technicians, and more. Each is highly qualified in his/her respective fields. Several have Ph.D’s — including National Medal of Science awardee Lynn Margulis. She, along with the other experts, exposes the fraud of NIST and discusses how the scientific method should have been applied and acknowledges the “overwhelming” evidence of high temperature incendiaries in all dust samples of the WTC. High-rise architects and structural engineers layout the evidence in the features of the destruction of these three high-rises that point inevitably to explosive controlled demolition.

…so you say that all those Technical & Building Professionals with a lot more experience than you are………… Troofers and idiots…
oh there is more…… actually” troofers” pilots… they say that official story is impossible too… what they can know about flying- right?
” Pilots for 9-11 Truth – World Trade Center Attack”

Those two documents are professional documents, nothing like” loose change” video. Simple questions- is it possible….. and simple answers: why an official story doesnt add up.
2 +2= 4 always, but official story says some thing else. I know that most of those ppl who say: NO IT CANT BE POSSIBLE dont even bother to have a second look.
” Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Herman Goering

By: geekengineer

geekengineer — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 18:16:48 +0000

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/28/al-qaida-ahmadinejad-911-conspiracy

By: Christopher Moore

Christopher Moore — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 18:11:42 +0000

Nope. 9/11 Troofers are idiots. You guys have absolutely no clue how to coordinate theory and evidence. You don’t even understand the nature of what does and does not constitute evidence. That’s ok, because not everyone can or should be a scientist or an academic engineer. Failure on those fronts does not necessarily equate to idiot-dom. However, what makes 9/11 Troofers idiots is that they are perfectly willing to accept as fact what some raving lunatic disc jockey in Texas says, yet they immediately discount the findings of people that have spent a majority of their lives studying in the exact field most relevant to the problem at hand.

BTW, my arguments on the facts are not based on ad hominem. My arguments are based on sound scientific and engineering principles, and on some reasonable appeal to authority. The arguments of those writing the journal articles that I reference are based on science. There is no argumentum ad hominem here. Merely rational argument with accusations of idiocy thrown in for effect.

By: chris

chris — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 04:00:54 +0000

I believe that 9-11 was an inside job. I thought it was a ridiculous idea and then I started looking at the evidence and came to my conclusion. I am willing to be proven wrong. But I have to say… the “9-11 truthers are morons” ad hominem is a bit much. There are rational and irrational people on both sides of this debate and ad hominem is by definition irrational.

By: psikeyhackr

psikeyhackr — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:52:40 +0000

You watch it as many times as you want. I have had at least a dozen different people try to convince me that it if meaningful in relation to 9/11. It has fewer levels than my model and we have no way of knowing how much it was deliberately weakened.

People that claim to LOVE PHYSICS can’t figure out why skyscrapers must have steel frames? Does that building have a steel frame? Is it a skyscraper?

Where have these physics people been demanding accurate data on the distributions of steel and concrete in the two towers for the last NINE YEARS? After this much time people who CLAIM to love physics have to keep other people from understanding it. But I suppose it is difficult for them to play intellectual big shots if they actually make it comprehensible.
.

By: Geekengineer

Geekengineer — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 13:24:42 +0000

Watch it again:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=97f_1297190596

By: psikeyhackr

psikeyhackr — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 19:54:06 +0000

{{{ If Richard Feynman were still alive today there would be no ‘Troofer’ movement. }}}

Of course if he were alive today and demanded accurate data on the distribution of steel in the towers then you might have a problem. LOL

Does that have anything to do with gravity? Is the specific heat of steel relevant to fires? If there was enougH steel on the 81st level of the south tower to support another 29 stories then how could it geT hot enough to weaken in LESS THAN ONE HOUR?
.

By: Geekengineer

Geekengineer — Fri, 11 Feb 2011 18:37:34 +0000

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=97f_1297190596

By: Professor Pint

Professor Pint — Fri, 11 Feb 2011 02:44:45 +0000

If Richard Feynman were still alive today there would be no ‘Troofer’ movement. He would have debunked it in some stupidly clever statement or by dipping a piece of steel into a hot cup of coffee to show that it gets bendier, or something else that would make any troofer go “oh yeah! – hadn’t thought of that!!?!”

So come on debunkers – get your act together! You obviously haven’t done a very good job if there are still people out there thinking it was Bush administration initiated nano thermite demolition, have you?
No!