General/Off-topic |
|
|
|
9/11 - Islamic Terrorism or American Terrorism?
|
1. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 04:51 am |
Danish Scientist on TV: Nano-thermite Behind Collapse of WTC Buildings on 9/11, Not Planes
On the morning of April the 6th, Professor Niels Harrit of Copenhagen University in Denmark, who is an expert in nano-chemistry, was interviewed for an entire 10 minutes during a news program on the topic of the nano-thermite found in the dust from the World Trade Centre, (WTC). This explosive interview is posted at YouTube, with English subtitles here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6DQjBfbn24
During this news report, Harrit, who is one of the nine scientists primarily responsible for the pivotal paper entitled: ‘Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe’, talks about how their research, which was conducted over 18 months, led to the conclusion that planes did not cause the collapse of the three buildings at the WTC on 9/11.
He says that they found such large quantities of nano-thermite in the dust from the WTC, that he believes that this product, which has the ability to melt metal, as well as break things apart, must have been brought into the WTC site in tonnes, on pallets. Consequently, he suggests that we need to address this matter with those who were in charge of the security at the World Trade Centre on 9/11.
Harrit, like Dr Steven Jones who also played a major role in this ground-breaking research, refers to their findings as “the loaded gun” and implies that military personnel may be able to enlighten us more on the little-known topic of nano-thermite, which differs from regular thermite in a number of significant ways, including that its ignition temperature is far lower than that of the conventional kind.
|
|
2. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 07:24 am |
Conspiricy theory number 3.632......
|
|
3. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 07:50 am |
Conspiricy theory number 3.632......
truth hurts? you can`t handle it?
Edited (4/23/2009) by tamikidakika
|
|
4. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 12:48 pm |
truth hurts? you can`t handle it?
First you open a topic and then when someone disagreees with you, you jump on them!!! Maybe YOU are unable to handle it!
Edited (4/23/2009) by catwoman
|
|
5. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 12:57 pm |
First you open a topic and then when someone disagreees with you, you jump on them!!! Maybe YOU are unable to handle it!
when someone disagrees with a topic, he/she has to come up with a plausable argument to prove his/her point. I see that neither you or Trudy is able to do that.
|
|
6. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:00 pm |
truth hurts? you can`t handle it?
Canim, I´ve heard so many ´theories´ (mind the ´´ !!) that I hardly believe anyone of them at all. From KGB, Mossad, Bush in person, CIA, MIT, MI5, FBI, Al-Quaida, Elisabeth the Queen of England to Marsians. (Just not heard any story in which a cloggie was accused.... )
|
|
7. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:03 pm |
Canim, I´ve heard so many ´theories´ (mind the ´´ !!) that I hardly believe anyone of them at all. From KGB, Mossad, Bush in person, CIA, MIT, MI5, FBI, Al-Quaida, Elisabeth the Queen of England to Marsians. (Just not heard any story in which a cloggie was accused.... )
I`m still waiting for you to refute this hard fact that there was explosives in the building. I don`t care about what the queen of england has told you.
|
|
8. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:17 pm |
And I say it was Ydoolb Traf from the planet of Yloh Teihs who destroyed the towers with undetectable thought stream. Now, tami, please refute this theory
|
|
9. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:24 pm |
And I say it was Ydoolb Traf from the planet of Yloh Teihs who destroyed the towers with undetectable thought stream. Now, tami, please refute this theory
if you want me to refute it you first have to prove it.
|
|
10. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:34 pm |
if you want me to refute it you first have to prove it.
I just did
As for your "sensational" theory of conspiracy, google a tad more to get this and millions of alike explanations. Geezz..get a life tami, stop looking for cheap excitement, don´t you know that all theories of conspiracy are construed in such a way to seem really plausible on the first glance (and on the second and third as well)
|
|
11. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:37 pm |
I just did
As for your "sensational" theory of conspiracy, google a tad more to get this and millions of alike explanations. Geezz..get a life tami, stop looking for cheap excitement, don´t you know that all theories of conspiracy are construed in such a way to seem really plausible on the first glance (and on the second and third as well)
I don`t have to take your words out of your bottom as "proof". I`m still waiting for our beloved christian defenders to refute this professor`s findings. otherwise keep quite( a more polite way to say shut up)
|
|
12. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:45 pm |
I don`t have to take your words out of your bottom as "proof". I`m still waiting for our beloved christian defenders to refute this professor`s findings. otherwise keep quite( a more polite way to say shut up)
What do Xtians have to do with this now? And those are not my findings just as neither is your "sensational" outdated theory the world has already proven wrong Must feel awful to feel like you invented a bike and see a car
|
|
13. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:49 pm |
What do Xtians have to do with this now? And those are not my findings just as neither is your "sensational" outdated theory the world has already proven wrong Must feel awful to feel like you invented a bike and see a car
yeah that`s why all the western white christians who have posted on this thread so far are whining about how "this news is crap". what a coincidence!
|
|
14. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:52 pm |
yeah that`s why all the western white christians who have posted on this thread so far are whining about how "this news is crap". what a coincidence!
so far your threaddidn´t stir up vast attention as the only people commenting were Cat, Trudy and me. Two of us definitely aren´t Christian, not sure about the third. Is it so hard to understand that you´re wrong, regardless of the religion or lack of it of the folks who comment
|
|
15. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 01:56 pm |
so far your threaddidn´t stir up vast attention as the only people commenting were Cat, Trudy and me. Two of us definitely aren´t Christian, not sure about the third. Is it so hard to understand that you´re wrong, regardless of the religion or lack of it of the folks who comment
who is wrong? me? it wasn`t me who has proven that 9/11 was carried out by America. Try harder next time.
|
|
16. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 02:00 pm |
search online for "Zeitgeist"
i believe it was translated into many languages to be more understandable
it helps to accept many things
|
|
17. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 02:01 pm |
Quoting tamikidakika
when someone disagrees with a topic, he/she has to come up with a plausable argument to prove his/her point. I see that neither you or Trudy is able to do that.
my point was that you are not able to handle criticism/disagreement. Trudy said that the article you posted is a conspiracy theory and you jumped on her for that -- instead of coming up with a plausible argument to disprove her opinion..
|
|
18. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 02:06 pm |
my point was that you are not able to handle criticism/disagreement. Trudy said that the article you posted is a conspiracy theory and you jumped on her for that -- instead of coming up with a plausible argument to disprove her opinion..
you could be a very good politicain cw. if Trudy thinks it is a conspiracy theory she has to refute the proof of this professor has came up with. Do you now see why it`s you who can`t handle things?
|
|
19. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 02:12 pm |
who is wrong? me? it wasn`t me who has proven that 9/11 was carried out by America. Try harder next time.
Proven? Is that a fact? For as far as I know there are dozens of theories, of which you always pick the siliest ones Not really surprising if we observe your lack of general knowledge and inability of critical thinking
|
|
20. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 02:17 pm |
Proven? Is that a fact? For as far as I know there are dozens of theories, of which you always pick the siliest ones Not really surprising if we observe your lack of general knowledge and inability of critical thinking
I`m not surprised that you call a scientific proof a "theory". you haven`t been to highschool, dd. have you?
Edited (4/23/2009) by tamikidakika
|
|
21. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 02:20 pm |
you could be a very good politicain cw. if Trudy thinks it is a conspiracy theory she has to refute the proof of this professor has came up with. Do you now see why it`s you who can`t handle things?
thanks for the compliment! it´s really impossible to have a dialogue with you!!! why am I even trying.. I should have learned by now.
|
|
22. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 02:30 pm |
I`m not surprised that you call a scientific proof a "theory". you haven`t been to highschool, dd. have you?
As a matter of fact I have, but it´s not there I learnt that we call something "proof" only until somebody proves otherwise. The Dannish theory was proven wrong, hence the proofs are not really proofs, are they?. How many times do I need to tell you to start READING before showing off with IGNORANCE?
|
|
23. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 02:38 pm |
As a matter of fact I have, but it´s not there I learnt that we call something "proof" only until somebody proves otherwise. The Dannish theory was proven wrong, hence the proofs are not really proofs, are they?. How many times do I need to tell you to start READING before showing off with IGNORANCE?
what`s the "Dannish theory"? when was it proven wrong? who did prove it wrong? how did he prove it wrong?
it may hurt but, no one can rival you in exposing ignorance, dd
|
|
24. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 03:52 pm |
it may hurt but, no one can rival you in exposing ignorance, dd
I think you are THE champion in that! (And runner up as well..... )
|
|
25. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 03:59 pm |
don`t think.
you suck at it
|
|
26. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 06:34 pm |
don`t think.
you suck at it
Sucking? Rumour goes that is YOUR specialty Tami, in ALL meanings of the word......
|
|
27. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 06:37 pm |
Sucking? Rumour goes that is YOUR specialty Tami, in ALL meanings of the word......
oooo-eeerrr
|
|
28. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 06:44 pm |
Sucking? Rumour goes that is YOUR specialty Tami, in ALL meanings of the word......
why are you revealing our private secrets, Trudy?
|
|
29. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 06:47 pm |
why are you revealing our private secrets, Trudy?
OMG, a failure in biology too! Don´t they tell you in Turkey the difference between girls and boys?
|
|
30. |
23 Apr 2009 Thu 09:07 pm |
what`s the "Dannish theory"? when was it proven wrong? who did prove it wrong? how did he prove it wrong?
it may hurt but, no one can rival you in exposing ignorance, dd
Google dear tami, goole and answers thou shalt find
|
|
31. |
24 Apr 2009 Fri 12:48 am |
Google dear tami, goole and answers thou shalt find
why don´t you look after your baby, Daydreamer? Don´t make yourself tired so much because of not having an ability to refute the facts of 9/11. You had better care about your terrorist (as you have called your baby as a terrorist).
Go Signor tamikidakika. I am supporting you with all my heart. It makes me cheerful whenever you bomb those incurable lads without using dynamites located on the floors of the buildings.
|
|
32. |
24 Apr 2009 Fri 02:10 am |
why don´t you look after your baby, Daydreamer?
How do you know I don´t?
Don´t make yourself tired so much because of not having an ability to refute the facts of 9/11. You had better care about your terrorist (as you have called your baby as a terrorist).
I don´t need to have the ability to refute "proofs" that go beyond my knowledge of chemistry, architecture and technology. A quick browse on engineering forums discussing the theory tami fell in love with let me believe that this theory doesn´t add up, an extensive debate between specialists explained the matter fully. If you´re interested google discussion boards with specialists discussing this issue and you will see that yourself.
Thank you for your concern for my Little Terrorist, he´s doing great and gets all the attention he needs
|
|
33. |
24 Apr 2009 Fri 08:26 am |
I don´t need to have the ability to refute "proofs" that go beyond my knowledge of chemistry, architecture and technology. A quick browse on engineering forums discussing the theory tami fell in love with let me believe that this theory doesn´t add up, an extensive debate between specialists explained the matter fully. If you´re interested google discussion boards with specialists discussing this issue and you will see that yourself.
what "engineering" forum is that, dd?
stormfront.org?
|
|
34. |
24 Apr 2009 Fri 12:04 pm |
what "engineering" forum is that, dd?
stormfront.org?
simple google groups search did the trick Then a Polish site for conspiracy theories, then even Irish boards.ie have a debate even you´ll be able to follow:
Why it´s a pile of rubbish
and more questions this theory doesn´t answer
- But how do you smuggle 100 tonnes of explosives into building.
- How do you place these explosives.
- Oh and thermite is a chemical reaction not a an explosive.
- How did the thermite not burn immediately when the plane crashed into the building?
- How would the cables controlling these ´explosives´ not be cut by the plane crashing in?
- How did they get the thermite in the exact position for the plane to hit and subsequently the building to collapse from?
- Are there any experiments to show this nice thesis could work in practice?
- Why wouldn´t the thermite not just burn a hole in the steel and pour through, it doesn´t burn evenly after all?
Edited (4/24/2009) by Daydreamer
[deciding that one sentence wasn´t enough and I had the time to copy paste :P]
|
|
35. |
24 Apr 2009 Fri 05:08 pm |
what "engineering" forum is that, dd?
stormfront.org?
Apparently you know a lot about stormfront.org else you wouldn´t have mentioned it! Are you a regular visitor maybe, Tami?
|
|
36. |
24 Apr 2009 Fri 10:38 pm |
Apparently you know a lot about stormfront.org else you wouldn´t have mentioned it! Are you a regular visitor maybe, Tami?
no they don`t accept anyone non-white and non-christian, but I can assure you that most of the members are Dutch.
Edited (4/24/2009) by tamikidakika
|
|
37. |
24 Apr 2009 Fri 10:43 pm |
no they don`t accept anyone non-white and non-christian, but I can assure you that most of the members are Dutch.
I didn´t know that, meaning you ARE still steps ahead of me finding out how to become a member and reading enough to know members nationalities. Just admit Tami, you would love to become a member!
|
|
38. |
25 Apr 2009 Sat 12:01 am |
I didn´t know that, meaning you ARE still steps ahead of me finding out how to become a member and reading enough to know members nationalities. Just admit Tami, you would love to become a member!
hold on Trudy!Don´t give tami any of your buck!He is a member of Anti Polish Vienna against group and unfortunately in this group there is a strong pledge saying
I will not have any enemies except Polish ones
and I will not belong to any groups except Anti Polish ones..
you lost your chance cloggie.....))))
|
|
39. |
25 Apr 2009 Sat 01:09 am |
hold on Trudy!Don´t give tami any of your buck!He is a member of Anti Polish Vienna against group and unfortunately in this group there is a strong pledge saying
I will not have any enemies except Polish ones
and I will not belong to any groups except Anti Polish ones..
you lost your chance cloggie.....))))
and anti-American, and anti-Christian ...quite a big portion of the world to hate at such young age
|
|
40. |
25 Apr 2009 Sat 01:12 am |
and anti-American, and anti-Christian ...quite a big portion of the world to hate at such young age
should we both ask him-naber kari kiz manita nasil????
|
|
41. |
25 Apr 2009 Sat 01:15 am |
should we both ask him-naber kari kiz manita nasil????
nay, he´s had his dose of whipping on tc this week. Pushing it would be simply mean
|
|
42. |
25 Apr 2009 Sat 01:18 am |
nay, he´s had his dose of whipping on tc this week. Pushing it would be simply mean
hmmmm,he is so silent,I bet he is observing our united force..and wondering what is the mistery of Poles)))compared to Russians...but it does not make difference for Tami...all is fish...
|
|
43. |
25 Apr 2009 Sat 01:22 am |
hmmmm,he is so silent,I bet he is observing our united force..and wondering what is the mistery of Poles)))compared to Russians...but it does not make difference for Tami...all is fish...
yeah dobrowski or ivanovitch, fark etmez as long as they´re there to hate them
|
|
|