Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mostly they smoke too much pot and are idiots. Or are just very gullible and think a YouTube video is evidence " I prefer peer reviewed and published science. That's how I know 9/11 was not what we were told it was. Got any science? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no time for the following conspiracy theories... The earth is flat. Aliens visit in ufos. Atheism. The Royals are Lizards. 9/11 was done by jihadists suspending the laws of physics. Hollow Earth theory Paul McCartney is a clone " Atheism? Mr. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no time for the following conspiracy theories... The earth is flat. Aliens visit in ufos. Atheism. The Royals are Lizards. 9/11 was done by jihadists suspending the laws of physics. Hollow Earth theory Paul McCartney is a clone Atheism? Mr. " I don’t believe in God, I didn’t think that made me a conspiracy theorist  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories" I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Question everything  "But don’t believe poorly executed YouTube experiments. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no time for the following conspiracy theories... The earth is flat. Aliens visit in ufos. Atheism. The Royals are Lizards. 9/11 was done by jihadists suspending the laws of physics. Hollow Earth theory Paul McCartney is a clone Atheism? Mr. I don’t believe in God, I didn’t think that made me a conspiracy theorist "According to the world's religions (and the vast majority of the people in the world, 5 out if every 6) you think know that for thousands of years, millions of people are just making up a story about how everything came into being, just to gain power and wealth, while ignoring all science and evidence. Yep, sounds exactly like a conspiracy theory doesn't it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Ps don't tell anyone I told you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Question everything
But don’t believe poorly executed YouTube experiments."YouTube has a lot of trash but I don't discredit everything on there. Where as the BBC now....hmm! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no time for the following conspiracy theories... The earth is flat. Aliens visit in ufos. Atheism. The Royals are Lizards. 9/11 was done by jihadists suspending the laws of physics. Hollow Earth theory Paul McCartney is a clone Atheism? Mr. I don’t believe in God, I didn’t think that made me a conspiracy theorist
According to the world's religions (and the vast majority of the people in the world, 5 out if every 6) you think know that for thousands of years, millions of people are just making up a story about how everything came into being, just to gain power and wealth, while ignoring all science and evidence.
Yep, sounds exactly like a conspiracy theory doesn't it?"There have been thousands of religions throughout history, all of which contradict each other. Thus anyone who believes in any particular religion is in the same position as an atheist in respect of all religions except their own. Or to put in in simple terms. A Christian believes, say. 9999 religions are wrong. An atheist believes 10,000 religions are wrong. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should all be open to possibilities no matter how strange or unlikely they are. " No, absolutely not. We should NOT be open to the idea that the world is flat. We should NOT be open to the idea that vaccines are bad. You have to identify ones that go too far and be absolutely damning about rebutting them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no time for the following conspiracy theories... The earth is flat. Aliens visit in ufos. Atheism. The Royals are Lizards. 9/11 was done by jihadists suspending the laws of physics. Hollow Earth theory Paul McCartney is a clone Atheism? Mr. I don’t believe in God, I didn’t think that made me a conspiracy theorist
According to the world's religions (and the vast majority of the people in the world, 5 out if every 6) you think know that for thousands of years, millions of people are just making up a story about how everything came into being, just to gain power and wealth, while ignoring all science and evidence.
Yep, sounds exactly like a conspiracy theory doesn't it?
There have been thousands of religions throughout history, all of which contradict each other. Thus anyone who believes in any particular religion is in the same position as an atheist in respect of all religions except their own.
Or to put in in simple terms. A Christian believes, say. 9999 religions are wrong. An atheist believes 10,000 religions are wrong. "You're mixing up atheism and being atheist in respect of 1 specific version of theism (including theist vs theist). A purely atheist person would be atheist even if no religions existed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no time for the following conspiracy theories... The earth is flat. Aliens visit in ufos. Atheism. The Royals are Lizards. 9/11 was done by jihadists suspending the laws of physics. Hollow Earth theory Paul McCartney is a clone Atheism? Mr. I don’t believe in God, I didn’t think that made me a conspiracy theorist
According to the world's religions (and the vast majority of the people in the world, 5 out if every 6) you think know that for thousands of years, millions of people are just making up a story about how everything came into being, just to gain power and wealth, while ignoring all science and evidence.
Yep, sounds exactly like a conspiracy theory doesn't it?
There have been thousands of religions throughout history, all of which contradict each other. Thus anyone who believes in any particular religion is in the same position as an atheist in respect of all religions except their own.
Or to put in in simple terms. A Christian believes, say. 9999 religions are wrong. An atheist believes 10,000 religions are wrong.
You're mixing up atheism and being atheist in respect of 1 specific version of theism (including theist vs theist).
A purely atheist person would be atheist even if no religions existed
"If no religions existed, it would mean no one believed in God, hence everyone would be an atheist as currently denied, but because everyone believed it, there wouldn't be a term for it, just as there is no term for believe who believe that London is the capital of the UK. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I react so hard against Conspiracy Theories by default, I really hate them, although at the same time there are some batshit sounding claims that were true.... The FBI was spying on former Beatle John Lennon. The Dalai Lama is a CIA agent. The Gulf of Tonkin incident on August 2, 1964, was faked to provoke American support for the Vietnam War. For decades, tobacco companies buried evidence that smoking is deadly. With the advances in technology, the government is using its vast resources to track citizens. So you / I need to be a bit wary of totally dismissing everything as soon as it's called a Conspiracy theory. People do conspire and theories are often wonderful things." The government don't need to invest vast sums on tracking citizens, they just need to mine Amazon data | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no time for the following conspiracy theories... The earth is flat. Aliens visit in ufos. Atheism. The Royals are Lizards. 9/11 was done by jihadists suspending the laws of physics. Hollow Earth theory Paul McCartney is a clone Atheism? Mr. I don’t believe in God, I didn’t think that made me a conspiracy theorist
According to the world's religions (and the vast majority of the people in the world, 5 out if every 6) you think know that for thousands of years, millions of people are just making up a story about how everything came into being, just to gain power and wealth, while ignoring all science and evidence.
Yep, sounds exactly like a conspiracy theory doesn't it?
There have been thousands of religions throughout history, all of which contradict each other. Thus anyone who believes in any particular religion is in the same position as an atheist in respect of all religions except their own.
Or to put in in simple terms. A Christian believes, say. 9999 religions are wrong. An atheist believes 10,000 religions are wrong.
You're mixing up atheism and being atheist in respect of 1 specific version of theism (including theist vs theist).
A purely atheist person would be atheist even if no religions existed
If no religions existed, it would mean no one believed in God, hence everyone would be an atheist as currently denied, but because everyone believed it, there wouldn't be a term for it, just as there is no term for believe who believe that London is the capital of the UK. "Nope, people would be agnostic | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should all be open to possibilities no matter how strange or unlikely they are. No, absolutely not. We should NOT be open to the idea that the world is flat. We should NOT be open to the idea that vaccines are bad. You have to identify ones that go too far and be absolutely damning about rebutting them." You can still dedicate your time and effort in to disproving something is wrong or untrue while still being open to the possibility that something beyond what you believe is true. That is how quite a few factual discoveries are made in the first place, by going against what was originally thought or presented as official. Closing ourselves off to possibilies no matter how outlandish or insane is extremely limiting in thought. Being open to something is not the same as believing the hype and misinformation involved in it. Question everything, never stop questioning it. You can believe it at the same time. The minute we stop questioning is the minute we become comfortable with what we are told and just accept it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all." Go back to bed America, your government has figured it out .......  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all." I remember watching a very detailed documentary on 9/11 a few years ago, which explained precisely how the buildings collapsed without the suspension of any laws of physics. In fact, it was because of the laws of physics that the twin towers did collapse.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all. I remember watching a very detailed documentary on 9/11 a few years ago, which explained precisely how the buildings collapsed without the suspension of any laws of physics. In fact, it was because of the laws of physics that the twin towers did collapse. "Except that documentary didn't include any real science and instead pure speculation. A tv show vs newtonian physics Point to the specific science or don't bother with your pop culture sofa warrior tactics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should all be open to possibilities no matter how strange or unlikely they are. No, absolutely not. We should NOT be open to the idea that the world is flat. We should NOT be open to the idea that vaccines are bad. You have to identify ones that go too far and be absolutely damning about rebutting them." I disagree with this. Have a look at all of the official images NASA have released of the ‘Globe’ then watch them tell you they haven’t yet worked out how to get out of Earth’s atmosphere while informing you of the fact they lost all the data relating to the so called ‘moon landings’. I’m questioning it all! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all. I remember watching a very detailed documentary on 9/11 a few years ago, which explained precisely how the buildings collapsed without the suspension of any laws of physics. In fact, it was because of the laws of physics that the twin towers did collapse.
Except that documentary didn't include any real science and instead pure speculation.
A tv show vs newtonian physics
Point to the specific science or don't bother with your pop culture sofa warrior tactics. "It’s this kind of aggression that doesn’t help the people who want to believe in alternative ideas. Don’t be rude or aggressive, present data in a professional manner and allow people to check said data and discuss it like grown ups rather than throwing silly names at people to try and make your fact. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I react so hard against Conspiracy Theories by default, I really hate them, although at the same time there are some batshit sounding claims that were true.... The FBI was spying on former Beatle John Lennon. The Dalai Lama is a CIA agent. The Gulf of Tonkin incident on August 2, 1964, was faked to provoke American support for the Vietnam War. For decades, tobacco companies buried evidence that smoking is deadly. With the advances in technology, the government is using its vast resources to track citizens. So you / I need to be a bit wary of totally dismissing everything as soon as it's called a Conspiracy theory. People do conspire and theories are often wonderful things."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all. I remember watching a very detailed documentary on 9/11 a few years ago, which explained precisely how the buildings collapsed without the suspension of any laws of physics. In fact, it was because of the laws of physics that the twin towers did collapse.
Except that documentary didn't include any real science and instead pure speculation.
A tv show vs newtonian physics
Point to the specific science or don't bother with your pop culture sofa warrior tactics.
It’s this kind of aggression that doesn’t help the people who want to believe in alternative ideas.
Don’t be rude or aggressive, present data in a professional manner and allow people to check said data and discuss it like grown ups rather than throwing silly names at people to try and make your fact."To coin a phrase, it's not worth it. Only fringe "experts" question the official 9/11 story. The vast majority of engineers etc accept the official version and there's any number of websites debunking the conspiracists. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all. I remember watching a very detailed documentary on 9/11 a few years ago, which explained precisely how the buildings collapsed without the suspension of any laws of physics. In fact, it was because of the laws of physics that the twin towers did collapse.
Except that documentary didn't include any real science and instead pure speculation.
A tv show vs newtonian physics
Point to the specific science or don't bother with your pop culture sofa warrior tactics.
It’s this kind of aggression that doesn’t help the people who want to believe in alternative ideas.
Don’t be rude or aggressive, present data in a professional manner and allow people to check said data and discuss it like grown ups rather than throwing silly names at people to try and make your fact.
To coin a phrase, it's not worth it. Only fringe "experts" question the official 9/11 story. The vast majority of engineers etc accept the official version and there's any number of websites debunking the conspiracists. "That’s why I generally fall out of favour with the theorists, it’s the way they interact. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We should all be open to possibilities no matter how strange or unlikely they are. No, absolutely not. We should NOT be open to the idea that the world is flat. We should NOT be open to the idea that vaccines are bad. You have to identify ones that go too far and be absolutely damning about rebutting them. You can still dedicate your time and effort in to disproving something is wrong or untrue while still being open to the possibility that something beyond what you believe is true. That is how quite a few factual discoveries are made in the first place, by going against what was originally thought or presented as official. Closing ourselves off to possibilies no matter how outlandish or insane is extremely limiting in thought. Being open to something is not the same as believing the hype and misinformation involved in it. Question everything, never stop questioning it. You can believe it at the same time. The minute we stop questioning is the minute we become comfortable with what we are told and just accept it." I'm 100% with you on this. We should question everything. K | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've heard all this rain we've had recently is because the Europeans have been cloud seeding to try to flood us out and reconsider Brexit, as they're thinking we'll have to ask for their help soon "It’s got to be Brexit to blame | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all. I remember watching a very detailed documentary on 9/11 a few years ago, which explained precisely how the buildings collapsed without the suspension of any laws of physics. In fact, it was because of the laws of physics that the twin towers did collapse.
Except that documentary didn't include any real science and instead pure speculation.
A tv show vs newtonian physics
Point to the specific science or don't bother with your pop culture sofa warrior tactics. "The documentary that I watched was based on scientific principles and evidence and not speculation, and was explained in detail by fully qualified engineers. It was not pop culture and nor was it on YouTube. You made the assertion that for the official explanation of 9/11 to be true, all the laws of physics would have had to be suspended, so I believe that it's incumbent upon you to provide the evidence to back up your ridiculous statement. If you can do that then I may accept your version of events, but you won't, because you can't. (by evidence, I mean peer reviewed scientific evidence and not some nut- jobs on YouTube) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all. I remember watching a very detailed documentary on 9/11 a few years ago, which explained precisely how the buildings collapsed without the suspension of any laws of physics. In fact, it was because of the laws of physics that the twin towers did collapse.
Except that documentary didn't include any real science and instead pure speculation.
A tv show vs newtonian physics
Point to the specific science or don't bother with your pop culture sofa warrior tactics.
The documentary that I watched was based on scientific principles and evidence and not speculation, and was explained in detail by fully qualified engineers. It was not pop culture and nor was it on YouTube.
You made the assertion that for the official explanation of 9/11 to be true, all the laws of physics would have had to be suspended, so I believe that it's incumbent upon you to provide the evidence to back up your ridiculous statement. If you can do that then I may accept your version of events, but you won't, because you can't. (by evidence, I mean peer reviewed scientific evidence and not some nut- jobs on YouTube) "The most entertaining aspect of the conspiracy theory is that the US government was apparently able to arrange a massive conspiracy involving a cast of thousands and no one involved has blown the whistle, yet on the other hand made tons of rookie mistakes easily spotted by randoms on the Internet. Not to mention that they forgot to frame people from the countries they apparently wanted to invade and, in fact, framed people who were nationals of a US ally. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I always find conspiracies interesting with how people can look at data from different angles and come up with different theories I'm science a theory is a model that not only explains every single piece of evidence but also has no contradictory evidence disputing it. On 9/11 all of newtonian physics were said to have been suspended (Source: NIST report into the destruction of WTC7) What's most worrying is that the public accepted it because people in authority told them so, not because it was ever proven. In fact the exact opposite happened and scientists all around the world have published studies that show we were all lied to. There's zero published scientific evidence from the government - nothing at all. I remember watching a very detailed documentary on 9/11 a few years ago, which explained precisely how the buildings collapsed without the suspension of any laws of physics. In fact, it was because of the laws of physics that the twin towers did collapse.
Except that documentary didn't include any real science and instead pure speculation.
A tv show vs newtonian physics
Point to the specific science or don't bother with your pop culture sofa warrior tactics.
The documentary that I watched was based on scientific principles and evidence and not speculation, and was explained in detail by fully qualified engineers. It was not pop culture and nor was it on YouTube.
You made the assertion that for the official explanation of 9/11 to be true, all the laws of physics would have had to be suspended, so I believe that it's incumbent upon you to provide the evidence to back up your ridiculous statement. If you can do that then I may accept your version of events, but you won't, because you can't. (by evidence, I mean peer reviewed scientific evidence and not some nut- jobs on YouTube)
The most entertaining aspect of the conspiracy theory is that the US government was apparently able to arrange a massive conspiracy involving a cast of thousands and no one involved has blown the whistle, yet on the other hand made tons of rookie mistakes easily spotted by randoms on the Internet.
Not to mention that they forgot to frame people from the countries they apparently wanted to invade and, in fact, framed people who were nationals of a US ally. "This is why I never go for them, it would take so much to cover it up. Somebody would feel guilty and speak out. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"NIST (the institution given the task of explaining why the towers fell) admitted in their report that free fall acceleration occurred in WTC7 - a 47 story, bomb proofed site, when they claimed that a "unique event" (aka a miracle in layman's terms) happened that stopped the newtonian laws functioning. They even made the mistake of providing a graph in the report. When asked if they tested for explosives (a law they had to follow) they said no. Go and watch building 7 come down against all known science (Source: University of Fairbanks Alaska report into building 7) and ask yourself why the BBC reported it had already fallen 30 minutes prior, even though no high rise steel building had NEVER collapsed due to fire in the history of steel buildings. NIST said that fire alone brought down the building - it was never hit by any plane. Then check out: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out. An excellent documentary and keep away from the tv programs made by the same organisations that own the weapons manufacturers, the politicians and the petrochemical, banking and media companies." So the BBC are in on the conspiracy? Why on earth would the conspirators tell a foreign broadcasting company? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I saw one about a London terror attack. They said the terrorists were actors and it was all faked. I was in London at the time and it was very real.. But after watching the documentary I started to doubt myself. "Did yiu catch the radio 4 I ter view that day with the guy who ran the crisis actor company who was running an exact copy of that situation, right at that same time and effort end right down to the same time station etc? He said it wax all going as planned. It was a genuine public safety drill. Then suddenly instead of fake bombs real ones blew. And what was a drill suddenly became a real event? Genuine guy, real company with checkable facts. The same thing happened on 9/11 - the military had planes all over the US airspace running drills on what would happen if planes were hijacked and flown into buildings. Fake radar images placed into real time air traffic control screens. Total chaos. Over 20 drills being ran that day. And if you don't think the US government is evil enough - check out operation Northwoods and the plan to blow up a fake plane off the coast of florid a just so they could invade Cuba. Jfk refused and we all know what happened next. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"NIST (the institution given the task of explaining why the towers fell) admitted in their report that free fall acceleration occurred in WTC7 - a 47 story, bomb proofed site, when they claimed that a "unique event" (aka a miracle in layman's terms) happened that stopped the newtonian laws functioning. They even made the mistake of providing a graph in the report. When asked if they tested for explosives (a law they had to follow) they said no. Go and watch building 7 come down against all known science (Source: University of Fairbanks Alaska report into building 7) and ask yourself why the BBC reported it had already fallen 30 minutes prior, even though no high rise steel building had NEVER collapsed due to fire in the history of steel buildings. NIST said that fire alone brought down the building - it was never hit by any plane. Then check out: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out. An excellent documentary and keep away from the tv programs made by the same organisations that own the weapons manufacturers, the politicians and the petrochemical, banking and media companies." No, not a miracle, but scientific fact. I've read the NIST report that you cited in your original post and it explains precisely why the buildings collapsed and it wasn't a miracle or explosives. I'm not wasting any more of my time with you, because you've just virtually admitted that you're a conspiracy theory nut-job.
Have a nice day. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have no time for the following conspiracy theories... The earth is flat. " I suspect you're conspiring to discredit genuine believers. For your information: Membership of the flat earth society has now reached all four corners of the globe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"NIST (the institution given the task of explaining why the towers fell) admitted in their report that free fall acceleration occurred in WTC7 - a 47 story, bomb proofed site, when they claimed that a "unique event" (aka a miracle in layman's terms) happened that stopped the newtonian laws functioning. They even made the mistake of providing a graph in the report. When asked if they tested for explosives (a law they had to follow) they said no. Go and watch building 7 come down against all known science (Source: University of Fairbanks Alaska report into building 7) and ask yourself why the BBC reported it had already fallen 30 minutes prior, even though no high rise steel building had NEVER collapsed due to fire in the history of steel buildings. NIST said that fire alone brought down the building - it was never hit by any plane. Then check out: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out. An excellent documentary and keep away from the tv programs made by the same organisations that own the weapons manufacturers, the politicians and the petrochemical, banking and media companies. No, not a miracle, but scientific fact. I've read the NIST report that you cited in your original post and it explains precisely why the buildings collapsed and it wasn't a miracle or explosives. I'm not wasting any more of my time with you, because you've just virtually admitted that you're a conspiracy theory nut-job.
Have a nice day."Quote anything from them that includes data and actual facts. Seeing as all their models and data is classified then it would be fun to see your reply. I have the pdf on my phone. And once you're done, you can update the university of Fairbanks Alaska - as their report has just been published and they found nothing in it at all. Over to you - or are you just lying because of your cognitive dissonance? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"NIST (the institution given the task of explaining why the towers fell) admitted in their report that free fall acceleration occurred in WTC7 - a 47 story, bomb proofed site, when they claimed that a "unique event" (aka a miracle in layman's terms) happened that stopped the newtonian laws functioning. They even made the mistake of providing a graph in the report. When asked if they tested for explosives (a law they had to follow) they said no. Go and watch building 7 come down against all known science (Source: University of Fairbanks Alaska report into building 7) and ask yourself why the BBC reported it had already fallen 30 minutes prior, even though no high rise steel building had NEVER collapsed due to fire in the history of steel buildings. NIST said that fire alone brought down the building - it was never hit by any plane. Then check out: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out. An excellent documentary and keep away from the tv programs made by the same organisations that own the weapons manufacturers, the politicians and the petrochemical, banking and media companies. No, not a miracle, but scientific fact. I've read the NIST report that you cited in your original post and it explains precisely why the buildings collapsed and it wasn't a miracle or explosives. I'm not wasting any more of my time with you, because you've just virtually admitted that you're a conspiracy theory nut-job.
Have a nice day.
Quote anything from them that includes data and actual facts.
Seeing as all their models and data is classified then it would be fun to see your reply. I have the pdf on my phone. And once you're done, you can update the university of Fairbanks Alaska - as their report has just been published and they found nothing in it at all.
Over to you - or are you just lying because of your cognitive dissonance?"If it’s classified, how do you have it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"NIST (the institution given the task of explaining why the towers fell) admitted in their report that free fall acceleration occurred in WTC7 - a 47 story, bomb proofed site, when they claimed that a "unique event" (aka a miracle in layman's terms) happened that stopped the newtonian laws functioning. They even made the mistake of providing a graph in the report. When asked if they tested for explosives (a law they had to follow) they said no. Go and watch building 7 come down against all known science (Source: University of Fairbanks Alaska report into building 7) and ask yourself why the BBC reported it had already fallen 30 minutes prior, even though no high rise steel building had NEVER collapsed due to fire in the history of steel buildings. NIST said that fire alone brought down the building - it was never hit by any plane. Then check out: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out. An excellent documentary and keep away from the tv programs made by the same organisations that own the weapons manufacturers, the politicians and the petrochemical, banking and media companies. No, not a miracle, but scientific fact. I've read the NIST report that you cited in your original post and it explains precisely why the buildings collapsed and it wasn't a miracle or explosives. I'm not wasting any more of my time with you, because you've just virtually admitted that you're a conspiracy theory nut-job.
Have a nice day.
Quote anything from them that includes data and actual facts.
Seeing as all their models and data is classified then it would be fun to see your reply. I have the pdf on my phone. And once you're done, you can update the university of Fairbanks Alaska - as their report has just been published and they found nothing in it at all.
Over to you - or are you just lying because of your cognitive dissonance?"But I'm not the one who's lying, Mr. Fraudypants. I'm really tired of you now. Bye bye.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"NIST (the institution given the task of explaining why the towers fell) admitted in their report that free fall acceleration occurred in WTC7 - a 47 story, bomb proofed site, when they claimed that a "unique event" (aka a miracle in layman's terms) happened that stopped the newtonian laws functioning. They even made the mistake of providing a graph in the report. When asked if they tested for explosives (a law they had to follow) they said no. Go and watch building 7 come down against all known science (Source: University of Fairbanks Alaska report into building 7) and ask yourself why the BBC reported it had already fallen 30 minutes prior, even though no high rise steel building had NEVER collapsed due to fire in the history of steel buildings. NIST said that fire alone brought down the building - it was never hit by any plane. Then check out: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out. An excellent documentary and keep away from the tv programs made by the same organisations that own the weapons manufacturers, the politicians and the petrochemical, banking and media companies. No, not a miracle, but scientific fact. I've read the NIST report that you cited in your original post and it explains precisely why the buildings collapsed and it wasn't a miracle or explosives. I'm not wasting any more of my time with you, because you've just virtually admitted that you're a conspiracy theory nut-job.
Have a nice day.
Quote anything from them that includes data and actual facts.
Seeing as all their models and data is classified then it would be fun to see your reply. I have the pdf on my phone. And once you're done, you can update the university of Fairbanks Alaska - as their report has just been published and they found nothing in it at all.
Over to you - or are you just lying because of your cognitive dissonance?
If it’s classified, how do you have it?"The model data is classified - the report is public domain. They don't provide any evidence at all and are currently being sued and possibly criminally investigated for reporting false science. A serious crime. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"NIST (the institution given the task of explaining why the towers fell) admitted in their report that free fall acceleration occurred in WTC7 - a 47 story, bomb proofed site, when they claimed that a "unique event" (aka a miracle in layman's terms) happened that stopped the newtonian laws functioning. They even made the mistake of providing a graph in the report. When asked if they tested for explosives (a law they had to follow) they said no. Go and watch building 7 come down against all known science (Source: University of Fairbanks Alaska report into building 7) and ask yourself why the BBC reported it had already fallen 30 minutes prior, even though no high rise steel building had NEVER collapsed due to fire in the history of steel buildings. NIST said that fire alone brought down the building - it was never hit by any plane. Then check out: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out. An excellent documentary and keep away from the tv programs made by the same organisations that own the weapons manufacturers, the politicians and the petrochemical, banking and media companies. No, not a miracle, but scientific fact. I've read the NIST report that you cited in your original post and it explains precisely why the buildings collapsed and it wasn't a miracle or explosives. I'm not wasting any more of my time with you, because you've just virtually admitted that you're a conspiracy theory nut-job.
Have a nice day.
Quote anything from them that includes data and actual facts.
Seeing as all their models and data is classified then it would be fun to see your reply. I have the pdf on my phone. And once you're done, you can update the university of Fairbanks Alaska - as their report has just been published and they found nothing in it at all.
Over to you - or are you just lying because of your cognitive dissonance?
If it’s classified, how do you have it?
The model data is classified - the report is public domain. They don't provide any evidence at all and are currently being sued and possibly criminally investigated for reporting false science. A serious crime."Don't disagree with this guy folks, he'll send you a nasty mail and then block you before you can reply.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"NIST (the institution given the task of explaining why the towers fell) admitted in their report that free fall acceleration occurred in WTC7 - a 47 story, bomb proofed site, when they claimed that a "unique event" (aka a miracle in layman's terms) happened that stopped the newtonian laws functioning. They even made the mistake of providing a graph in the report. When asked if they tested for explosives (a law they had to follow) they said no. Go and watch building 7 come down against all known science (Source: University of Fairbanks Alaska report into building 7) and ask yourself why the BBC reported it had already fallen 30 minutes prior, even though no high rise steel building had NEVER collapsed due to fire in the history of steel buildings. NIST said that fire alone brought down the building - it was never hit by any plane. Then check out: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out. An excellent documentary and keep away from the tv programs made by the same organisations that own the weapons manufacturers, the politicians and the petrochemical, banking and media companies. No, not a miracle, but scientific fact. I've read the NIST report that you cited in your original post and it explains precisely why the buildings collapsed and it wasn't a miracle or explosives. I'm not wasting any more of my time with you, because you've just virtually admitted that you're a conspiracy theory nut-job.
Have a nice day.
Quote anything from them that includes data and actual facts.
Seeing as all their models and data is classified then it would be fun to see your reply. I have the pdf on my phone. And once you're done, you can update the university of Fairbanks Alaska - as their report has just been published and they found nothing in it at all.
Over to you - or are you just lying because of your cognitive dissonance?
If it’s classified, how do you have it?
The model data is classified - the report is public domain. They don't provide any evidence at all and are currently being sued and possibly criminally investigated for reporting false science. A serious crime.
Don't disagree with this guy folks, he'll send you a nasty mail and then block you before you can reply.
"Get over yourself | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Epstein didn't kill himself." Neither did Fred West or Harold Shipman. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Emu pushed Rod Hull off the roof. And if you dont believe me, just google what he did to Michael Parkinson " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Epstein didn't kill himself." No his cell mate accidentally slipped 17 times whilst pealing a grape using a samurai sword. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Everyone listen to Noam Chomsky on 911 on youtube "Noam is a legend, I can’t get enough of listening to this guy speak on all things! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Everyone listen to Noam Chomsky on 911 on youtube "i love chomsky | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Most conspiracy theorists I've come across all seem to have the same type of M.O. They're all usually misfits who latch onto a conspiracy theory because it gives them a sense of belonging and an air of superiority over we more gullible types. They seem fairly plausible at first, because they'll quote some sort of 'evidence' to substantiate their claims, usually couched in some faux science speak for added gravitas. All of this can almost certainly be discredited if someone does a bit of basic research, but hardly anyone bothers and so the conspiracy gathers momentum. If you challenge a conspiracy theorist they'll firstly attempt to make you appear to be stupid for not seeing the 'truth' and believing the official line, and if that doesn't work then they'll begin to get abusive. Classic example above. They're best ignored tbh, which is advice I wish I'd taken myself." I said something similar early, they are always so aggressive | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get intrigued by some theories around conspiracies Take UFO phenomena Most are likely to be highly advanced military vehicles, but how has this technology got so advanced? The likely hood of humans being the only industrially advanced beings in the cosmos is nil.. Life exists in severe conditions on the planet and will exist most likely in various forms in our own solar system, yet alone other systems. So this theory has some evidence and validity. So then you have to think, if this does, what about other conspiracy theories I’m not saying they are true, most I think are laughable But a few do present difficult evidence not to disprove Any thoughts?" There is no scientific proof that life exists anywhere else in the universe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Question everything
Why?"Because there is ALWAYS a hidden agenda. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get intrigued by some theories around conspiracies Take UFO phenomena Most are likely to be highly advanced military vehicles, but how has this technology got so advanced? The likely hood of humans being the only industrially advanced beings in the cosmos is nil.. Life exists in severe conditions on the planet and will exist most likely in various forms in our own solar system, yet alone other systems. So this theory has some evidence and validity. So then you have to think, if this does, what about other conspiracy theories I’m not saying they are true, most I think are laughable But a few do present difficult evidence not to disprove Any thoughts? There is no scientific proof that life exists anywhere else in the universe." Exactly! Just a bunch of Hollywood producers perpetuating an idea. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I get intrigued by some theories around conspiracies Take UFO phenomena Most are likely to be highly advanced military vehicles, but how has this technology got so advanced? The likely hood of humans being the only industrially advanced beings in the cosmos is nil.. Life exists in severe conditions on the planet and will exist most likely in various forms in our own solar system, yet alone other systems. So this theory has some evidence and validity. So then you have to think, if this does, what about other conspiracy theories I’m not saying they are true, most I think are laughable But a few do present difficult evidence not to disprove Any thoughts? There is no scientific proof that life exists anywhere else in the universe. Exactly! Just a bunch of Hollywood producers perpetuating an idea." The argument that there must be life out there based on the sheer number of planets in the universe is an argument based on a false hope that we're not alone. Once you actually start drilling down into the requirements for life to survive that huge number of planets drops dramatically and then when you filter in the ingredients needed for life to actually develope the chances of life existing at a level that's higher than ours is even less. And as of this moment the latest scientific evidence points to us being alone in the universe. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The argument that there must be life out there based on the sheer number of planets in the universe is an argument based on a false hope that we're not alone. Once you actually start drilling down into the requirements for life to survive that huge number of planets drops dramatically and then when you filter in the ingredients needed for life to actually develope the chances of life existing at a level that's higher than ours is even less. And as of this moment the latest scientific evidence points to us being alone in the universe." It's not "hope" from a scientific perspective. I've not heard any prominent scientist dismiss the idea of life elsewhere once. UFO's doing anal probes on Texan farmers is a very different thing to other life forms trillions and trillions of miles away, and no proper expert would dismiss the latter, however slim they think it is. Being proven wrong is usually a really positive and exciting thing for them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I totally agree with 9/11 theory" But you don't even exist... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The argument that there must be life out there based on the sheer number of planets in the universe is an argument based on a false hope that we're not alone. Once you actually start drilling down into the requirements for life to survive that huge number of planets drops dramatically and then when you filter in the ingredients needed for life to actually develope the chances of life existing at a level that's higher than ours is even less. And as of this moment the latest scientific evidence points to us being alone in the universe. It's not "hope" from a scientific perspective. I've not heard any prominent scientist dismiss the idea of life elsewhere once. UFO's doing anal probes on Texan farmers is a very different thing to other life forms trillions and trillions of miles away, and no proper expert would dismiss the latter, however slim they think it is. Being proven wrong is usually a really positive and exciting thing for them." Show me the existing published scientific evidence that has been scrutinised by peers in the scientific community that points to there being life anywhere other than on this planet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Most conspiracy theories are bogus. The truth is one person alone shot President Kennedy, man landed on the moon, Diane died in a tragic car accident, the twin towers collapsed as a result of two planes crashing into them, aliens have not visited earth and Marilyn Monroe committed suicide. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."" Nah, most ‘official’ stories are bogus more like & dropping a smart phrase after a bunch of trash usually makes the trash sound believable | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Conspiracy theorists, are they a straight block or do you love ‘em?" You've gotta love 'em. SUch cute childish adherance to someone else's dumb idea, and a total disregard for all evidence is quite endearing | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Conspiracy theorists, are they a straight block or do you love ‘em? You've gotta love 'em. SUch cute childish adherance to someone else's dumb idea, and a total disregard for all evidence is quite endearing "Couldn't have put it better myself. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Conspiracy theorists, are they a straight block or do you love ‘em? You've gotta love 'em. SUch cute childish adherance to someone else's dumb idea, and a total disregard for all evidence is quite endearing
Couldn't have put it better myself.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled""The Mitchell and Webb sketches about the moon landing and Diana conspiracy theories are hilarious. "We'd have to build a big rocket to fake a moon landing" "so why don't we use the big rocket to actually, you know, go to the moon?" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the problem with all this conspiracy stuff is maybe 1-5%of the stories you read are true..the rest are goverment controlled media leaks designed to discredit the real stories, to the point that the people that report the "real stories" are made out to be crazy ... there is a name for it but i cant remember what its called..the military use it when trying to get the population of a country to get behind them going to war...they've started using this system in politics..the first trial was the brexit vote....and it worked" People voted for Brexit because they wanted Brexit not because of some Governmental conspiracy theory. The only conspiracy theory associated with Brexit is that people voted for Brexit because of lies and misunderstanding. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the problem with all this conspiracy stuff is maybe 1-5%of the stories you read are true..the rest are goverment controlled media leaks designed to discredit the real stories, to the point that the people that report the "real stories" are made out to be crazy ... there is a name for it but i cant remember what its called..the military use it when trying to get the population of a country to get behind them going to war...they've started using this system in politics..the first trial was the brexit vote....and it worked" The word you’re looking for is propaganda | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the problem with all this conspiracy stuff is maybe 1-5%of the stories you read are true..the rest are goverment controlled media leaks designed to discredit the real stories, to the point that the people that report the "real stories" are made out to be crazy ... there is a name for it but i cant remember what its called..the military use it when trying to get the population of a country to get behind them going to war...they've started using this system in politics..the first trial was the brexit vote....and it worked" Oh Ffs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the problem with all this conspiracy stuff is maybe 1-5%of the stories you read are true..the rest are goverment controlled media leaks designed to discredit the real stories, to the point that the people that report the "real stories" are made out to be crazy ... there is a name for it but i cant remember what its called..the military use it when trying to get the population of a country to get behind them going to war...they've started using this system in politics..the first trial was the brexit vote....and it worked" The government at the time didn't want Brexit, so does that mean it failed? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"there is a name for it but i cant remember what its called..the military use it when trying to get the population of a country to get behind them going to war...they've started using this system in politics..the first trial was the brexit vote....and it worked People voted for Brexit because they wanted Brexit not because of some Governmental conspiracy theory. The only conspiracy theory associated with Brexit is that people voted for Brexit because of lies and misunderstanding." You make it sound like these two things are independent. Like marketing and spreading hatred and lies aren't a huge reason behind why they "wanted" it. Everyone is a product of society, they aren't coming to these conclusions without outside influence. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I find it ridiculous when people do not believe in conspiratorial behaviour. You probably approach it from one tiny area, the did that happen or not scenario? I'll ask you a question was there conspiratorial behaviour in the killing of Jews in World War 2? Or is there conspiratorial conduct when two little kids agree to steal sweets out of a shop? Or when two people agree to have an affair outside of their marriages? Or when a group of people try to make sure that only a certain type of person joins their organisation when it is illegal to do so? Conspiratial behaviours are around us all the time. Sometimes in the Political realm. In the media. In law and order too. Wherever people are there will be conspiracies and always have been. " This doesn't mean every possible act of human beings involves some sort of conspiracy far, far, far, and far from it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
