Is Freefall Proof of Controlled Demolition?

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Well, we know what mofo looks like now..
//http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kpyENa0nSUg&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DkpyENa0nSUg

[AtheistMoFo]

*This is going to be a long post.  If you are literacy-challenged, please skip.*

It should be noted that those whom you are calling "no conspiracy" theorists actually think that there was a conspiracy, which encompasses 93 and the Pentagon strike as well as WTC.

FINALLY you have figured out what I have been trying to get across from the get-go.  The idea that ALL conspiracy theories are necessarily bullshit is preposterous.  But many of the participants in this debate persist in the childish bickerings of "You are a conspiracy theorist, a conspracy nut, therefore everything you say is bullshit."

Since the get-go, I have been trying to get the OCT camp to admit that we do agree on at least one thing:  There WAS a conspiracy.  There can be no question.  It is the "who, how and why" part we disagree on.

The difference is that some conspiracies are more believable than others.

Right again!  So the argument is not whether or not there was a conspiracy, but which theory is more believable.

My contention is that when you look at all the factors from a neutral perspective, the Official Conspracy Theory is the most outrageous one of them all.  A few pages back I listed several facts that should make everyone raise an eyebrow, including the passport surviving the fireball inferno, terrorists cramming for their final flight test on their way to the airport, and the very topic of this thread itself; freefall acceleration of WTC 7.  But those are only a few drops in one very large bucket.  There are far too many strange coincidences to not even be suspicious.

Popular Mechanics makes a valiant attempt to explain away all the oddities, but under close scrutiny, their claims do not stand up.  And the media is relentless in their harping on how Al Qaeda and the muslims declared war on the United States.  They have to keep reinforcing the image to prevent it from fading.  (Jus like traditional religions have to keep reinforcing their bullshit on their indoctrinees.)  Can't you see the elephant in the living room?

The Official Conspiracy Theory contends that Osama bin Laden, 15 Saudi Arabians, 2 UAE persons, 1 Egyptian, and a Lebanonese, plus the phantom "20th hijacker" (assumedly muslim) plotted the entire crime.  But why should we rule out the possibility that non-arab, non-muslims may have been in on it?  Maybe even some israelis?  Or Americans?  The only reason many of you now rule out that possibility is because you believe the official dogma.  It was all Al Qaeda, and no one else.  If you would think objectively, you would at least have to question the OCT.

[AtheistMoFo]

Did you just use what was obviously a joke on my part to say that "this is what [we] really think"? Look, I already knew you're dumber than a sack of rocks before you said that, but... really? Really!?

See my reply to Thumpalumacus above.  Or have someone read it to you if it is too long to read yourself.

Oh, wait!  It was the guy with the funny hat whose attention span was unable to cope with more than sound byte size posts.  Oh, well.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Mofo..someone said Elvis is hiding under your bed. :shock:

[Insult to Rocks]

Popular Mechanics makes a valiant attempt to explain away all the oddities, but under close scrutiny, their claims do not stand up.

Sort of like your theory? The theory with multiple holes the size of the Marianas Trench in them? The theory that, if true, would only explain one aspect of the 9/11 attacks, and does not even adress any motive or means on how the demolitionists managed to do such?
Somehow I don't think Popular Mechanics has to worry about any competition.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

It's all pimple cream dude..911 threw all that dust up and some kid's got dust particles in their sweat pores and SON OF A BITCH..pimples.. thus selling pimple cream to generations of acne covered teenage grease balls.
Anything to make a buck.

[Jason78]

I can't believe that this thread is still happening.

And AtheistMoFo has yet to even turn up one stick of dynamite.

[Plu]

FINALLY you have figured out what I have been trying to get across from the get-go. The idea that ALL conspiracy theories are necessarily bullshit is preposterous. But many of the participants in this debate persist in the childish bickerings of "You are a conspiracy theorist, a conspracy nut, therefore everything you say is bullshit."

You got the order backwards. It's "everything you say is bullshit, therefor you are a conspiracy nut".

[Damarcus]

FINALLY you have figured out what I have been trying to get across from the get-go. The idea that ALL conspiracy theories are necessarily bullshit is preposterous. But many of the participants in this debate persist in the childish bickerings of "You are a conspiracy theorist, a conspracy nut, therefore everything you say is bullshit."

You got the order backwards. It's "everything you say is bullshit, therefor you are a conspiracy nut".

no don't you see, we refuse to blindly accept his claims at face value and demand crazy things like "proof" and "evidence" thus proving that we are all part of the conspiracy and trying to keep the public ignorant!

AtheistMoFo, the black helicopters are heading to your secluded cabin in the woods as we speak. (or type anyway.)

[Sargon The Grape]

See my reply to Thumpalumacus above.  Or have someone read it to you if it is too long to read yourself.

I think Thumpalumpacus is doing a plenty decent job at tearing you a new asshole right now. I have no particular desire to butt in. :)

[AtheistMoFo]

The difference is that some conspiracies are more believable than others.

Fair enough.

To borrow an analogy from J.B. Bury in his 1914 book, History of Freedom of Thought...
"Some people speak as if we were not justified in rejecting a [s:2akciilt]theological[/s:2akciilt] (insert) political (/insert) doctrine unless we can prove it false. But the burden of proof does not lie upon the rejecter. ... If you were told that in a certain planet revolving around Sirius there is a race of donkeys who speak the English language and spend their time in discussing eugenics, you could not disprove the statement, but would it, on that account, have any claim to be believed? Some minds would be prepared to accept it, if it were reiterated (insert) on FOX News, CNN, MSNBC et al. (/insert) often enough, through the potent force of suggestion."

MINDGAME: We know that police plant fake evidence on suspects only in movies and never in real life.  However, since 9/11 resembles a movie in so many ways, let's just hypothesize police planting a fake passport on the street close to the scene of the WTC destruction but at sufficient distance so it is not buried in the rubble.  Or on the other hand, let's hypothesize a passport (made of paper) survives an inferno that vaporizes the bodies of all passengers on the plane, as well as the two indestructible black boxes carried on every aircraft.  Which is more believable?

[Plu]

Of course the first is much more likely. But that still leaves your explanation of the events as an even larger pile of bull than the official story. (Which already contains a lot of bull.)

[Jason78]

I don't think that you can build a case on a single passport that seemed to survive the impact.

[AtheistMoFo]

Mofo..someone said Elvis is hiding under your bed. :shock:

Sort of like your theory? The theory with multiple holes the size of the Marianas Trench in them? The theory that, if true, would only explain one aspect of the 9/11 attacks, and does not even adress any motive or means on how the demolitionists managed to do such?
Somehow I don't think Popular Mechanics has to worry about any competition.

It's all pimple cream dude..911 threw all that dust up and some kid's got dust particles in their sweat pores and SON OF A BITCH..pimples.. thus selling pimple cream to generations of acne covered teenage grease balls.
Anything to make a buck.

I can't believe that this thread is still happening.

And AtheistMoFo has yet to even turn up one stick of dynamite.

You got the order backwards. It's "everything you say is bullshit, therefor you are a conspiracy nut".

no don't you see, we refuse to blindly accept his claims at face value and demand crazy things like "proof" and "evidence" thus proving that we are all part of the conspiracy and trying to keep the public ignorant!

AtheistMoFo, the black helicopters are heading to your secluded cabin in the woods as we speak. (or type anyway.)

I think Thumpalumpacus is doing a plenty decent job at tearing you a new asshole right now. I have no particular desire to butt in. :)

When you can't trump logic, just hurl insults.  That always works.

[Plu]

When you can't wield logic, everything sounds like an insult.