PDA

View Full Version : 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists are the stupidest people on the face of the planet.



BEATINGU
12-09-2012, 05:10 PM
I just don't understand how it's possible to be this stupid

Like, alright, I can understand JFK conspiracy theorists. The idea that Oswald was working with another person isn't that crazy

But 9/11 conspiracy theorists are just on another level of stupidity. They actually believe dancing Jews in a van did 9/11, like wtf??

Some pissed off terrorists hijacked some planes and flew them into buildings. What's so hard to comprehend about that? Terrorists have hijacked planes countless times in history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_hijackings

But, the idea that some Jews in a van and George Bush did 9/11 is absolutely stupid. Anyone that believes in 9/11 conspiracy theories should be put into a mental institution.

Discuss.

nohomobrah
12-09-2012, 05:15 PM
"the stupidest" award actually goes to your sorry ass for calling on the federal government to arrest every marijuana smoker.

9/11 conspiracies make more sense than you do, even chemtrails do libtard.

That's not to say that they have any reasonable foundation, but their stories make more sense than your political agenda.

Authoritarian kunt

BEATINGU
12-09-2012, 05:16 PM
"the stupidest" award actually goes to your sorry ass for calling on the federal government to arrest every marijuana smoker.

9/11 conspiracies make more sense than you do, even chemtrails do libtard.

Asking the Federal Government to enforce drug laws is stupid???

lmao! get out of here pothead

Unity45
12-09-2012, 05:17 PM
Asking the Federal Government to enforce drug laws is stupid???

lmao! get out of here pothead

http://www.bodybuildingforums.com.au/attachments/training-and-exercise/1226d1313732699-saunas-not_sure_if_srs.jpg

nohomobrah
12-09-2012, 05:19 PM
Asking the Federal Government to enforce drug laws is stupid???

lmao! get out of here pothead


Asking the federal government to go after individuals for petty crimes?

The DEA doesn't even charge bums that go doctor shopping for oxycodone, you are beyond retarded for thinking that their job involves busting individual drug users.

I didn't build the establishment, but you are still pretty dull for ever making that thread and wanting things to be taken that far.

Blaze it no avi phaggot

BlackJack619
12-09-2012, 05:20 PM
explain this
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77-10.jpg

alexsmhs
12-09-2012, 05:27 PM
Never argue with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.




^OP you are the idiot.

BEATINGU
12-09-2012, 05:28 PM
explain this
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77-10.jpg

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-pentagon


The Pentagon
At 9:37 am on 9/11, 51 minutes after the first plane hit the World Trade Center, the Pentagon was similarly attacked. Though dozens of witnesses saw a Boeing 757 hit the building, conspiracy advocates insist there is evidence that a missile or a different type of plane smashed into the Pentagon.

Big Plane, Small Holes
Claim: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile—part of an elaborate U.S. military coup. "This attack," he writes, "could only be committed by United States military personnel against other U.S. military personnel."


Hole Truth: Flight 77's landing gear punched a 12-ft. hole into the Pentagon's Ring C. (Photograph by Department of Defense)
FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.

Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."

The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide—not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.

Zedbimmer
12-09-2012, 05:31 PM
Are you doing some kind of R/P daily head count on "anti-Israelis"?

NumeroOnce
12-09-2012, 05:32 PM
It wouldn't be the first time the government considered attacking their own land to garner support for military actions

nutsy54
12-09-2012, 05:32 PM
explain this
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77-10.jpg
Explain what? That the major damage occurred where the majority of the airplane's mass impacted (with collapse lines more determined by structural design than anything else)? Or that thin aluminum wings didn't significantly damage reinforced concrete?

In and outta this thread, it will turn out like all the others... The consistent theme of Conspiracy Believers: Present false or irrelevant "evidence", then when it's proven false or irrelevant, change the subject and start all over again. Extra bonus points for making the final story as absolutely complex and convoluted as possible, involving an endless array of people and possibility for failure/discovery.

Fecalprotein
12-09-2012, 05:33 PM
explain this
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77-10.jpg

only a british broadcaster can do that

NumeroOnce
12-09-2012, 05:34 PM
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-pentagon

even the popular mechanics "debunking" has been debunked... it goes both ways

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/gopm/index.html

http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/604-debunking-the-real-911-myths-why-popular-mechanics-cant-face-up-to-reality-part-1.html

Judgment
12-09-2012, 05:42 PM
Some pissed off terrorists hijacked some planes and flew them into buildings. What's so hard to comprehend about that? Terrorists have hijacked planes countless times in history.

Bu-bu-but BROHAM! These cave dwelling dirty primitive neanderthals couldn't possibly pull this off! Derez no way dat they did the double back flip 720 degree barrel roll into dat pentagon becuz a guy on youtube said he couldn't! I'm 100%, no 80% almost certain dis is not possible becuz based on youtub and alex jones I'm an expert!!!

BEATINGU
12-09-2012, 05:43 PM
even the popular mechanics "debunking" has been debunked... it goes both ways

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/gopm/index.html

http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/604-debunking-the-real-911-myths-why-popular-mechanics-cant-face-up-to-reality-part-1.html


Just clicked the first link and it doesn't debunk anything in the popular mechanics argument relating to the Pentagon claim that i responded to. Instead it says, that the Pentagon is 11 miles from a military base, therefore the plane should have been shot down, lol.

bluejay83
12-09-2012, 05:43 PM
there is a ton of weird chit that went on that day.

-many of the alleged hijackers have been proven to be alive
-WTC7 being announced as collapsed whilst still standing in the background of a B/B/C. reporter
-9/11 happened 2 days after Rumsfeld announced $3trillion of the defence budget was "unaccounted for"
the plane that hit the pentagon crashed into the accounting department, and tower 2 happened to hold the only back-ups of the accounting records
-the top levels above the fire collapse first and pancake, which goes against the theory that the top end acted as a piledriver crushing the floors below
-planes don't dissapear into buildings... theres physically no way the wings could cut a hole in steel columns that thick.
-many commercial pilots with thousands of hours cant replicate the flightpath on the first several attempt.
-jet fuel cannot melt steel, and if is could even weaken it, the entire set of columns cannot simultaneously give way at the same time
-the tiny amount of debris remaining of the buildings
-reports of explosions at ground level, which aren't mentioned in any of the official reports
-the speeds they claim are physically not possible in that aircraft at that altitude. (these are turbofan engines not jet engines)
-not a single serial numbered part has been produced, the picture of the engine seen on the ground has been proven to be from another type of aircraft
-no seats or baggage can be seen anywhere, the flames are so hot they melt steel, but somehow a passport survives the baze
-20+story high column turned to dust
-all the "live" footage seen of the aircraft impacting don't actually show the aircraft impact.. the aircraft all hit the side of the building unseen by the cameras. the impact footage was only released the following day.
-there is no wingtip vortex seen left behind when the smoke starts to billow
-air defences shut down for just one day
-FEMA was already in NewYork preparing for a terrorist training exercise on 9/12



just to name a few.

BEATINGU
12-09-2012, 05:44 PM
Bu-bu-but BROHAM! These cave dwelling dirty primitive neanderthals couldn't possibly pull this off! Derez no way dat they did the double back flip 720 degree barrel roll into dat pentagon becuz a guy on youtube said he couldn't! I'm 100%, no 80% almost certain dis is not possible becuz based on youtub and alex jones I'm an expert!!!

Bro, 0.0001 percent of airline pilots said that they couldn't fly a plane into a building, after several years of flight-training

Clearly it was the jooz

CrazyTall
12-09-2012, 05:45 PM
Are you doing some kind of R/P daily head count on "anti-Israelis"?It sure seems like a bait thread if Ive ever seen one.

BEATINGU
12-09-2012, 05:48 PM
there is a ton of weird chit that went on that day.

-many of the alleged hijackers have been proven to be alive

Stopped reading right there

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Hijackers_still_alive

Dis-proven

J3remy
12-09-2012, 05:51 PM
there is a ton of weird chit that went on that day.

-many of the alleged hijackers have been proven to be alive
-WTC7 being announced as collapsed whilst still standing in the background of a B/B/C. reporter
-9/11 happened 2 days after Rumsfeld announced $3trillion of the defence budget was "unaccounted for"
the plane that hit the pentagon crashed into the accounting department, and tower 2 happened to hold the only back-ups of the accounting records
-the top levels above the fire collapse first and pancake, which goes against the theory that the top end acted as a piledriver crushing the floors below
-planes don't dissapear into buildings... theres physically no way the wings could cut a hole in steel columns that thick.
-many commercial pilots with thousands of hours cant replicate the flightpath on the first several attempt.
-jet fuel cannot melt steel, and if is could even weaken it, the entire set of columns cannot simultaneously give way at the same time
-the tiny amount of debris remaining of the buildings
-reports of explosions at ground level, which aren't mentioned in any of the official reports
-the speeds they claim are physically not possible in that aircraft at that altitude. (these are turbofan engines not jet engines)
-not a single serial numbered part has been produced, the picture of the engine seen on the ground has been proven to be from another type of aircraft
-no seats or baggage can be seen anywhere, the flames are so hot they melt steel, but somehow a passport survives the baze
-20+story high column turned to dust
-all the "live" footage seen of the aircraft impacting don't actually show the aircraft impact.. the aircraft all hit the side of the building unseen by the cameras. the impact footage was only released the following day.
-there is no wingtip vortex seen left behind when the smoke starts to billow
-air defences shut down for just one day



just to name a few.


that just scratches the surface

way too many coincidences and other **** for me to blindly accept the official fairytale

NumeroOnce
12-09-2012, 05:55 PM
Just clicked the first link and it doesn't debunk anything in the popular mechanics argument relating to the Pentagon claim that i responded to. Instead it says, that the Pentagon is 11 miles from a military base, therefore the plane should have been shot down, lol.

I was just proving a point that the infamous Popular Mechanics article isn't the end-all be-all of 9/11 arguments. I actually do believe a plane was flown into the Pentagon, I just don't believe the official story.

Judgment
12-09-2012, 05:57 PM
Bro, 0.0001 percent of airline pilots said that they couldn't fly a plane into a building, after several years of flight-training

Clearly it was the jooz

Hahahaha

ticktickytembo
12-09-2012, 06:31 PM
http://thumbs.newschoolers.com/index.php?src=http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/negged/grand/Thread-Backfire-Negged1.gif&size=400x1000

bluejay83
12-09-2012, 06:41 PM
Explain what? That the major damage occurred where the majority of the airplane's mass impacted (with collapse lines more determined by structural design than anything else)? Or that thin aluminum wings didn't significantly damage reinforced concrete?

In and outta this thread, it will turn out like all the others... The consistent theme of Conspiracy Believers: Present false or irrelevant "evidence", then when it's proven false or irrelevant, change the subject and start all over again. Extra bonus points for making the final story as absolutely complex and convoluted as possible, involving an endless array of people and possibility for failure/discovery.

and yet they slice through steel beams which are strong enough to support 30+ stories of building above?

http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f10/311494d1319156557-9-11-woman-hole-woman-wtc-tower-hole-made-jet5.jpg




how does a 20+story high beam of steel turn to dust like this?


http://drjudywood.com/articles/why/whypics/46_wtc1spiretodustjg4.jpg

it didn't fall straight down into the ground.. because the basement wasn't damaged.

voodoo101
12-09-2012, 09:34 PM
Some pissed off terrorists hijacked some planes and flew them into buildings. What's so hard to comprehend about that? Terrorists have hijacked planes countless times in history.



Yea what's hard to comprehend about the magic show we gave you? Godammit don't think, believe.

Judgment
12-09-2012, 09:37 PM
and yet they slice through steel beams which are strong enough to support 30+ stories of building above?

And yet an air craft traveling 500 mph is supposedly like a tin can going through a cheese grater (or whatever stupid analogy voodoo came up with).

It falls at free fall; it doesn't.

It causes no damage; it sliced the building up.

bluejay83
12-09-2012, 09:44 PM
And yet an air craft traveling 500 mph is supposedly like a tin can going through a cheese grater (or whatever stupid analogy voodoo came up with).

It falls at free fall; it doesn't.

It causes no damage; it sliced the building up.

what?
dont confuse me with voodoo

Im pointing out the difference between wtc cartoon physics & a lack thereof at the pentagon... Why do the believers blindly ignore basic neutonian physics.

Every force has an equal & opposite... Not on 9/11

Dragger
12-09-2012, 10:22 PM
Literally for years conspiracy theorists claimed that the twin towers fell "straight down into their own foot print at free-fall speed" and "no debris could have damaged WTC7." And THIS somehow proved it was not only a demolition job, not only a government demo job, but a U.S. government demo job.

Now the same conspiracy theorists claim the twin towers "blew outward, with debris up to a 1/4 mile away" and the twin towers "fell at 80% free-fall speed" but that debris majically avoided and "blew around" WTC7. And this info somehow proved it was not only a demolition job, not only a government demo job, but a U.S. government demo job.

Only proof I see are whackjob conspiracy theorists do not know which way is up, they will pounce on ANY idea as long as it can be twisted to fit their story, and they ignore any and all discrepancies in their previous stories and claims like the plague.

tmac183
12-10-2012, 12:20 AM
OP, you are the weakest link goodbye

Poor Excuse
12-10-2012, 12:57 AM
Are you doing some kind of R/P daily head count on "anti-Israelis"?

LMAO this. dont feed him, guise.

abdus
12-10-2012, 03:02 AM
http://i47.tinypic.com/14yc0z.jpg

nohomobrah
12-10-2012, 04:43 AM
lolnegged by fail101

I don't know what I did to make you so butthurt, but those educational drug videos you watched in class when you were ten had some misinformation in them.

NewDude92
12-10-2012, 06:09 AM
lol phaggotry overload ITT

kill yourself