View Single Post
Old 07-23-2011, 08:05 AM   #63
Team Captain
cloppbeast's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Waynesboro
Posts: 868
Gender: Male
Member Number: 16124
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default Re: Mendenhall plans to sue endorser for dropping him

I would like to start by saying I don't necessarilly disagree with Thumper, because I understand this is a more complicated issue than most people recognize. I don't think anybody really can attain enough information to know whether the U.S. Federal Government orchestrated the attack or terrorists. It's kind of like trying to prove God does or doesn't exist - it can't be done.

Originally Posted by thumper View Post
No offense, but I can tell you have only done very superficial
research on this. There are clearly accounts of eye witnesses
that point to explosives going off in the basement right before
the planes hit. Account after account point to this. When the
firemen showed up, the lobby was completely destroyed, as
if bombs had already been set off. I could produce 100s of links -
not that that is proof by itself but why would these people experienced
these explosions if there weren't any? Why?
Were these eye witness testomonies from the day of the event, or years after - because if these stories came out well after the fact, then they mean little to nothing to me. For a conspiracy theorist, it would prove no difficulty to find a "witness" to make up a story who may or may not have been there. That doesn't mean necessarilly that it's not true; but for me, the liklihood of foul play is just too large for me to take such testomony seriously, unfortunately.

Then again, much of the non-conspiratory testomony I take with a grain of salt as well.

Originally Posted by thumper View Post
And, yes, steel can fail without actually melting but those temps weren't hot enough to make that happen, either. ?
This is not true. There is no set temperature which is needed to make steel weaken to the point of failure. You would have to consider all the loads on the structure before making such a statement. Possibly, under normal conditions, a jet fuel fire may not cause a building to collapse. But lets say, for instance, you fly a ****ing plane into a building, then the combination of tempeture load could cause it to collapse.

Originally Posted by thumper View Post
Also, there is not way, using the pancake theory, that those buildings could have fallen at free fall speeds. There would be resistance as each floor fell into the one below. It is physically impossible for them to fall as fast as they did. Where was the resistance? Why were there obvious visible plumes of smoke, usually associated with demolitions?
A well engineered building is designed to fail in such way - and sky scrapers are designed to fail exactly like the WTC. There is nothing suspicious about how the WTC fell - that was how it was meant to fall.

Originally Posted by thumper View Post
Oh, and then we got building 7. It wasn't even hit with a plane but it completely imploded at free fall speed. Care to explain how that could happen if they didn't use explosives to bring it down?
A blind squirrel finds acorns once in a while.

You make an excellent point. I really can't argue with this.

Originally Posted by thumper View Post
That's one of the weaker arguments to begin with so I don't even go there. But as far as pilot performance goes, I would reference how a flunkie pilot who couldn't even pilot a single-engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 like a fighter jet into the Pentagon at 500 MPH a few feet off the ground, with such precision that the lawn
of the Pentagon was untouched. None of the lawn was damaged at
all. So a flunkie could fly a jet that huge with such precision?
Unlikely, but not impossible.

Originally Posted by thumper View Post
Believe whatever makes you feel safe. Our govt. has been hijacked. The very thing that our founding fathers feared has happened. But if you want to believe the fairy tales offered by the very people who are destroying our free country and sending us into perpetual war, knock yourself out.
We all believe what we want to believe - including yourself. A libertarian-minded person naturally distrusts government, making them the most likely to believe such conspiracy theories. You can pretend as if you're the model of objectivism, but your proving yourself a fraud. The fact you made such a bold declaritive statement using a bunch of non-related, not-well-thought-out, and shoddy facts shows you are as biased as they come.

But, the fact remains, none of us truly know the answer, yet we argue about it as if we do. On top of that, we criticize each other - one side is a bunch of wackos, the other side is a bunch of sheep who believe anything the government tells them. This whole 9/11 discussion has become as polarizing as any issue in this country. To be honest, it's almost like religion - because everyone thinks they know the answer when they don't.
cloppbeast is offline   Reply With Quote