9-11 Synthetic Terror: The Cover Up, Five Years In
381Chris, why can't you just love 9/11 for its dark power forever, just like the rest of us?
kerble is right.
9-11 Synthetic Terror: The Cover Up, Five Years In
382( removed pending reorganization )
Last edited by clocker bob_Archive on Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
9-11 Synthetic Terror: The Cover Up, Five Years In
383( removed pending reorganization )
Last edited by clocker bob_Archive on Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
9-11 Synthetic Terror: The Cover Up, Five Years In
384( removed pending reorganization )
Last edited by clocker bob_Archive on Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
9-11 Synthetic Terror: The Cover Up, Five Years In
385( removed pending reorganization )
Last edited by clocker bob_Archive on Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
9-11 Synthetic Terror: The Cover Up, Five Years In
387( removed pending reorganization )
Last edited by clocker bob_Archive on Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
9-11 Synthetic Terror: The Cover Up, Five Years In
388Illuminati? Not Skull and Bones or the Masons?
9-11 Synthetic Terror: The Cover Up, Five Years In
389I'm not sure I'd stand behind everything this site has to say, but it seems to propose answers to just about every conspiracy theory argument I've seen here.
http://www.911myths.com/index.html
In particular, this paper by Prof. Greening is far more rigorous than anything I've seen from the other side, and the case he makes for (1) near free fall speed of collapse, and (2) virtually complete powdering of the remains, is very strong.
http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf#s ... 0wtc%20%22
Some have tried to talk this paper away with a lot of hand waving, but I've seen no quantified refutation.
(I've posted these before, but at least in this thread repetition seems to be fair game).
http://www.911myths.com/index.html
In particular, this paper by Prof. Greening is far more rigorous than anything I've seen from the other side, and the case he makes for (1) near free fall speed of collapse, and (2) virtually complete powdering of the remains, is very strong.
http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf#s ... 0wtc%20%22
Some have tried to talk this paper away with a lot of hand waving, but I've seen no quantified refutation.
(I've posted these before, but at least in this thread repetition seems to be fair game).
9-11 Synthetic Terror: The Cover Up, Five Years In
390galanter wrote:http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf#s ... 0wtc%20%22
Damn. I'm about halfway through and it's making my head hurt. I don't understand the math, but I get at least a little of the physics it's building.
You had me at Sex Traction Aunts Getting Vodka-Rogered On Glass Furniture