15 Years Later: New Scientific Paper in Reputable Physics Journal Argues 9/11 Was An Inside Job - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048800]a lot slower at low altitudes, correct me if im wrong, or keep insulting me, whatever makes you happy i guess[/QUOTE] No, answer my question. How do planes fly.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048792]ok so this the facts and scientific evidence that i have been bombarded with for the past several hours.[/QUOTE] Except you provided no evidence for your claim, you simply made a statement. You said it's impossible and provided no credible facts or data. Why should I trust you when you say "It's impossible"? We're all gonna need sources.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51048796]What's your source, though?[/QUOTE] you can call boeing and ask them yourself, do it right now you might learn something

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048792]ok so this the facts and scientific evidence that i have been bombarded with for the past several hours.[/QUOTE] look bud, i'ma lay some shit on you right now. i did this yesterday on facebook, with two super hillary supporters, by rustling their jimmies with the catheter rumor. all they did was hound me about how i was wrong and that they had been in medical study and practice for years (which was backed up by other people), but all i did was ask for a valid source. however, in the case of this thread, literally every stupid question you've posed has been answered by an article or video.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048792]ok so this the facts and scientific evidence that i have been bombarded with for the past several hours.[/QUOTE] We've been trying to reason with you, not 'bombard' you. If you're feeling overwhelmed, take some time to read over the posts made and try to formulate a well-rounded opinion that addresses all of the issues people have had with your posts so far. We're on step 4, btw: [QUOTE=Zyler;51048586][QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;51048543]hey man, quick question, what do you think to yourself when you choose to deny several valid points against you in favor of cherry picking responses, before leaving a generic 9/11 documentary here and bouncing? like don't you [I]feel[/I] like you're incorrect when you can't reasonably respond to anyone's points i'm so curious to your thought process right now[/QUOTE] We seem to be going through this never-ending loop: 1.He poses a question in a really condescending tone without any sources or evidence: [QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048003]Why would he buy a colossal asbestos liability with dwindling tenancy? Why would he take out a massive insurance policy on the towers for terrorist attacks just before 9/11 and go on to gain billions of dollars. Why did he not show up to his business meeting at windows of the world on the morning of 9/11? A Doctor appointment? ok. Lucky Larry.[/QUOTE] 2.Evidence gets presented and then his questions get disproven: [QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;51048033]Thank God we have internet geniuses like you to unravel literally the biggest fucking criminal action in recorded history, unveil the world's currently most succesful mass murderer and lift the veil from our eyes when every intelligence organization on Earth couldn't pin it on him. You did it. Now if only the FBI could use Google and discover the real truth! He'd be behind bars! Oh wait, the Illuminati would stop it, right? Silverstein earned 4.6 billion, he lost 7 billion in reconstruction. At the end of the day between building the new tower and all the other costs, he lost 10+ billion dollars. What a genius move by 'Lucky Larry', which only netted him several billion dollars in losses and the harassment from untold masses of insane truthers who can't be bothered to do the modicum of research or gather the least bit of common sense to dispel their conspiracy theories. I'm sorry if this is flaming but 9/11 brings out the loonies in my family and I've spent the last week doing nothing but debating every other person I see.[/QUOTE] 3.He completely ignores that the prior evidence was disproven and then moves the goalposts with a new set of condescending questions and remarks without acknowledging the previous ones, and we go back to step 1 [QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;51048061]I'm the layman, despite the fact I actually just sourced numbers to you and you have done absolutely nothing besides throw out videos and conspiracy theories that have been debunked a thousand times. Sure, it raised questions when I first saw it. "How did that building fall?" I asked, so I looked it up! "It fell because a fucking sky scraper fell on it and then it lit on fire," I read. That's sensible! But wait, there's more? "IT FELL BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT ILLUMINATI JEWISH LIZARDMEN PUT DEMOLITION THERMITE CHARGES IN THERE AND BLEW IT UP AT THE SAME TIME THEY FLEW PLANES INTO THE TWIN TOWERS AND DETONATED EXPLSOIVES IN THERE AT THE SAME TIME TO COLLECT INSURANCE MONEY!!!" I read. "That's fucking stupid!" I said, and after doing enough research to confirm my thought, here we are.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048079]a skyscraper did not fall on it, you know that, it was hit by a small amount of debris and a few floors caught fire. Watch the video. The fucking building goes into a perfectly symmetrical freefall. I guess controlled demolition companies went out of business after 9/11 because, apparently, all you have to do is start some random fires in a steel frame highrise and it will go into a freefall straight into its own footprint. I guess that the building code for highrises must have been seriously amended right? ...right? [editline]13th September 2016[/editline] Also I'm not saying I know who did it, that's not my point. Nor is it the point of the OP.[/QUOTE] Step 4.After repeating this loop a few times and running out of things to post, wait a while and then he starts attacking the character of the person who's debating him instead of presenting evidence [QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048240]Hey science man, i've got another question, why was there liquid metal and molten concrete in the rubble for months after the "collapse". Just curious. oh and thanks for clearing up that very sparky wire for all of us, we were very alarmed at first there.[/QUOTE] BloodyNine explains it more succintly here:[QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;51048254]So we managed to debunk your insurance nonsense so now you're just going to try and run circles on Buidling 7 and whenever anyone hits you with a counter point, you're just going to jump to the next conspiracy theory until everyone gets tired of responding to your drivel. At which point you're going to proclaim victory to yourself and continue to spread your craziness to other people.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=SelfishDragon;51048802]Except you provided no evidence for your claim, you simply made a statement. You said it's impossible and provided no credible facts or data. Why should I trust you when you say "It's impossible"? We're all gonna need sources.[/QUOTE] you shouldn't, you should investigate for yourself

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048803]you can call boeing and ask them yourself, do it right now you might learn something[/QUOTE] you might wanna call them yourself.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048809]you shouldn't, you should investigate for yourself[/QUOTE] Why are you even posting then. [editline]14th September 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048803]you can call boeing and ask them yourself, do it right now you might learn something[/QUOTE] Call them yourself, record them, post here.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048803]you can call boeing and ask them yourself, do it right now you might learn something[/QUOTE] So when asked to provide a source to back up your claims you go "I don't have one, go find it for me." Wow

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048782]no it's [b]impossible[/b] the engines cannot provide the thrust needed to push the airplane 500mph at 1000ft and even if they did the plane's aerodynamics would be overcome by the dense atmosphere at 1000ft[/QUOTE] Why do you keep jumping from topic to topic instead of responding to them in full? You still have not responded to the very first page of this thread in response to your "Lucky Larry" remark. There are many points where someone responds to you directly and you do not respond to them. Is that on purpose? You never responded to Headhumpy, for instance: [QUOTE=Headhumpy;51048476]Don't know why you guys are arguing about liquid vs molten. Anything that's molten is in the liquid state, doesn't mean it has to glow. However, if it's hot enough, as I said before, it glows due to the emission of thermal radiation.[/QUOTE] And many others. Is it because you are tired?

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048803]you can call boeing and ask them yourself, do it right now you might learn something[/QUOTE] Why can't you provide a source for your claim? Why should I believe what you say when you won't believe my theory that the towers were holograms?

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048803]you can call boeing and ask them yourself, do it right now you might learn something[/QUOTE] this is not how providing sources works

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048803]you can call boeing and ask them yourself, do it right now you might learn something[/QUOTE] What's your source on the 767 maximum attainable speed being less than 500mph at 1000 feet? Why should I find sources to support your claims (though of course I've already tried to look it up on Google)? Why don't you just watch the crash video and compare the distance travelled with the time? You should be able to measure the speed for yourself. Edit: I mean, you just claimed it was [I]impossible[/I] with nothing to back your claim up, and now you're simply telling me to contact Boeing directly? Why didn't Boeing dispute the official report if they [I]knew[/I] that their planes couldn't possibly go that fast? Or are they simply in on the conspiracy, and if so, why should they disclose proper numbers if I were to contact them?

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048803]you can call boeing and ask them yourself, do it right now you might learn something[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.boeing.com/contact-us.page[/url]

[QUOTE=SelfishDragon;51048814]So when asked to provide a source to back up your claims you go "I don't have one, go find it for me." Wow[/QUOTE] no what i mean is dont take anything anyone says as gospel, if i post sources i know what will happen you'll say oh those aren't reliable sources so theres no point. this gang that inhabits this thread has made up its mind from the beginning.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048828]no what i mean is dont take anything anyone says as gospel, if i post sources i know what will happen you'll say oh those aren't reliable sources so theres no point. this gang that inhabits this thread has made up its mind from the beginning.[/QUOTE] yeah, we're all just biased not you though, you're not one of the sheeple

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048828]no what i mean is dont take anything anyone says as gospel, if i post sources i know what will happen you'll say oh those aren't reliable sources so theres no point. this gang that inhabits this thread has made up its mind from the beginning.[/QUOTE] Oh my god. Oh my fucking god. Holy dragon dick circlejerk in a medieval smokehouse. The irony isnt just palpable, its a solid fucking object.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048828]no what i mean is dont take anything anyone says as gospel, if i post sources i know what will happen you'll say oh those aren't reliable sources so theres no point. this gang that inhabits this thread has made up its mind from the beginning.[/QUOTE] if you post a shitty source, then yeah. don't post fucking infowars and then claim it's the absolute truth.

Barbarian887 please answer me, how do planes fly.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048809]you shouldn't, you should investigate for yourself[/QUOTE] Sorry that's not really how a debate works. You don't throw statements out and then tell the opposite party to go determine whether its true or not. You should be prepared to back up whatever statements you're making or else nothing you say is credible in the slightest. In response to your "it's impossible for the plane to travel at that speed at that height," it's not. First, planes are built to withstand much more pressure than is actually detailed. By FAA standards that's 150% of the maximum amount of pressure that the plane is ever expected to experience in service. Second, the plane wasn't cruising at that altitude. The plane was in a dive up until the point of impact at a decline of roughly ~5000 ft./minute accelerating to ~10000 ft./minute by the crash point. In short, yes, this actually happened. And yes, the plane pierced the building through an accelerated dive from cruising altitude.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51047948]War = Profit for defense contractors and arms manufacturers and anyone selling anything that could be used in a war from toilet paper to bombs. Larry Silverstein also profited billions from the tower's demise. He also admitted to pulling WTC 7 in an interview.[/QUOTE] When he said [B]"pull it"[/B], I'm [I]preeeeeetty[/I] sure he was referring to the rescue operations. Considering that he was talking to, you know, the Fire Department, and not some bomb squad.

while we're at it barbarian, are you aware that the hijackers drank liquids containing dihydrogen oxide? it's the absolute truth, man.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048828]no what i mean is dont take anything anyone says as gospel, if i post sources i know what will happen you'll say oh those aren't reliable sources so theres no point. this gang that inhabits this thread has made up its mind from the beginning.[/QUOTE] We have considered and reasoned with every argument you've made here, if we just had our minds made up then we would've just mocked you instead of attempting to debate you. Have I been unfair to you in this thread? Have I, personally, been disrespectful to you? Does this mean you have no sources to back up your claim that planes cannot fly at 500mph at 1000ft?

[QUOTE=Zyler;51048841] Have I been unfair to you in this thread? Have I, personally, been disrespectful to you?[/QUOTE] No but he'll either say you have been or ignore this post, because it doesn't fit his narrative.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048828]no what i mean is dont take anything anyone says as gospel, if i post sources i know what will happen you'll say oh those aren't reliable sources so theres no point. this gang that inhabits this thread has made up its mind from the beginning.[/QUOTE] How can you claim something is [I]impossible [/I]but then simply refrain from backing your claims up because you don't think we'd accept your sources. It's [I]impossible[/I] to have a discussion like this, because you simply aren't playing by the rules of good debate. I can't just go "fuck it, I'll take his word for it" - you kinda have to have [B]very[/B] compelling evidence when you're claiming the US government killed 3000 of its own citizens to start a war in the middle east that cost tens of thousands of lives.

Jet Fuel might not melt steel beams but Barbarian887's embarrassment can.

[QUOTE=Warriorx4;51048815]Why do you keep jumping from topic to topic instead of responding to them in full? You still have not responded to the very first page of this thread in response to your "Lucky Larry" remark. There are many points where someone responds to you directly and you do not respond to them. Is that on purpose? You never responded to Headhumpy, for instance: And many others. Is it because you are tired?[/QUOTE] He's going to ignore this again, I'm sure of it.

[QUOTE=Pops;51048833]if you post a shitty source, then yeah. don't post fucking infowars and then claim it's the absolute truth.[/QUOTE] see, there it is, that bias you guys have, you already think i follow alex jones as if his bullshit has anything to do with 9/11 hes the broken clock that's right twice a day im way too tired though, going to bed. Good night.

[QUOTE=AaronM202;51048835]Barbarian887 please answer me, how do planes fly.[/QUOTE] I mean he isn't entirely wrong air resistance is higher at lower altitudes, which means it's more difficult to achieve higher speeds but 500 mph is nowhere near impossible. You can reach 500 mph on land.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;51048851]see, there it is, that bias you guys have, you already think i follow alex jones as if his bullshit has anything to do with 9/11 hes the broken clock that's right twice a day im way too tired though, going to bed. Good night.[/QUOTE] Post a good source, then.