[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff

A fun game might be trying to predict where the goalposts will move to this time.

Top candidates are:
1) doubling down on his arbitrary not a skyscraper unless 50 stories nonsense
2) Wikipedia is not a source
3) I said steel not steel reinforced concrete (big LOL at that one but I still day strong chance on this one)
4) Something racist or classist about Brazilians or poor people in general

Place your bets. Or write in your own candidates

I bet on: 5) Something about your psychological makeup inhibits you from accepting the truth.

He's already employed this technique at least twice.

A fine example of projection by a guy that can’t prove anything in the physical arguments. He resorts to a psychological profile that unwittingly explains why he can’t win on any issues here.

There cannot be a progressive collapse at the speed of fall you agreed to (20 s) needless to say also discounting the 10 s claim from NIST. Lower floors and internal structure MUST begin descent prior to impact.

This is in fact what the evidence points to, in essence, thereby discounting progressive collapse.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

No requirement to show working here. Let me know if you get stuck.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

There was not the debris evident after collapse to account for inward buckling conspiracy theory. No mass to cause gravitational collapse. Second, structural failure must occur prior to impact from above thereby discounting possible effect of weight causing collapse, disproven by 20 s (or NIST 10 s) collapse tine.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

That is a concrete claim that requires math. You saying it does nothing at all.

Absolutely not.

There is if you want anyone to care what you say. That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Dismissed.

Incorrect. Your claim requires evidence. Dismissed.

There was mass equivalent to the weight of the titanic on top of the crash site.

No.

Hope that helped!

Since you provided no evidence for the bolded claim, I dismiss it.

I've been kind of giggling at the repeated claim of "inward collapse" today, so I thought I would just look at some pictures.

Apparently, this is an "inward collapse."

It was this inward collapse that damaged WTC 7, which was a full block away, enough to tear a gash down much of one side of it and set it on fire.

You can actually see that happening in this pic, btw.

You don't really prove what you are calling physical arguments, especially when you are going through video and eye/ear witness reports. There have been several experiments done and replicated showing various materials being present in the WTC dust and rubble. As far as I know these experiments have never been debunked. I've linked to them and to a serious attempt to debunk which failed. It could be that, in the years between when I've been following this topic closely, someone has come along and debunked the results in question, but if we're going to be honest we all know they aren't going to be debunked. PhD scientists who publish in journals like Nature who carried out this research are not going to risk their careers over anything they think can be debunked and if anyone could debunk it they would have done so quickly.

People like you, programmable people, are the norm. And there seems to be hardly any joy people like you get more exquisite than showing master he is right. If someone could prove they are the better scientist while reinforcing the official narrative they would jump at the chance. Most funding for science comes from the government after all.

So you're right in two ways. The first way is that "proof" really isn't the standard, so no I can't prove anything physically. The 2nd way is that I don't have the means to establish any physical arguments as credible. That's why I link to those who can and do.

Oops you forgot to answer those questions again. Your bad.

And spoiler: the stuff he says "was never debunked" was debunked almost instantly. I know you won't, but don't fall for those lies.

The psychology I'm referencing...I don't know that it exists as a recognized discipline. I'm just seeing people freaking out over the suggestion that elites are lying to us, even though they don't know what the elites are even saying, and I'm trying to explain it. If you haven't read the materials, which themselves offer only a thin layer of defensive jargon, then you are not thinking for yourself, right?

The mass psychology used to control the masses is, I think, necessarily going to remain, like the weaponization of anthrax used in the 9/11 attacks, a dark art. There isn't anything to really study. There are things we can gleam from marketing, which has figured out to exploit base fears in people (if you don't get this breath mint the girl isn't going to **** you etc.) but how to get people to suspend thinking altogether is, I admit, not something I totally understand. But I'm pretty sure that being you being prodded to think for yourself will get an extreme emotional reaction towards rejecting that totally.

I'm not programmed to the extent you are. That's why I knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. That's why I knew they weren't going to find the 9/11 plans in OBL's compound. That why I knew what Israel would do 10 years ago as I expressed in the old I/P thread while everyone was reflexively calling me an anti-Semite. There are people among us, of which I am one, who knew pedophilia was rampant among elites. We also knew Pizzagate was fake, but didn't let that deter us from the truth.

I think we are primed for a rapid disillusionment spurred on in part by these Epstein files. I'm waiting to see how it affects people.

You're just programmed by different people, dude. And believe me, it's not pretty to watch.

I would be DELIGHTED to. But not until you answer the questions you've been ignoring.

See, you don't get to make claims, have them challenged, then never answer the challenges without conceding error, then demand others respond to you.

As soon as you respond, I will.

There is a LONG list of questions you've ignored.

Deuces, I have to laud your indefatigable efforts, but you'll never be a bigger moron than Victor. That dude is a natural.

More of this, Deuces. 911 is boring. Who should be treading lightly and what would you like to do to them if they dont?

You are being shown that Eyes Wide Shut is real and you still think those skeptical of elites are the ones being programmed?

I hope you're not an indication of how people react to the Epstein files, but you probably are. You're not going to revolt until your goodies are taken away, no matter what you are shown, I take it?

Why do you think I want to punish people? I'm worried about you. I'm worried about the sheeple. I'm Clarisse Starling in Silence of the Lambs, not Hannibal Lecter.

People should be treading lightly if they feel psychological strain as the social world is revealing itself to be something they've long denied, something they've called other people insane for thinking. If Eyes Wide Shut is real, then you are the mentally unstable, not those who have had the objectivity to see it this whole time. I would think that coming to terms with what you are seeing would be uncomfortable. It's not that every kook conspiracy theorist was right, but they were all pretty much more right than you. How does that make you feel? Or are you going to not look at the Epstein files and block it out?

If you dare open your eyes and see the conspiracy theories were rooted in truths, the next thing you will see is that the commies are always correct. Are you ready for that?

I don't know that I've ever seen a post of Victor's with which I fundamentally disagree. So far I'd be happy to be the same size moron as him. I would have thought you would think me the bigger moron since I'm less varnished and less tactical than him.

Actually I'm kinda pissed you are saying he is the bigger moron. When I put that through the sheeple translator it says you think he is better than me.

Exactly, now you are assessing the evidence. There was no inward collapse as asserted by NIST. Watch as the material turns to dust and spills outward and up, not down as per collapse. This is why a near free-fall was possible. Because the material was turned to dust in a matter of seconds, it did not buckle inwards in an impossible progressive collapse that defies the laws of gravity, inertia, momentum and energy conservation.

But look even more closely: you will witness with your own eyes as steel and concrete becomes nothing but plumes of fine powder in seconds. Note that air resistance can no longer be ignored. There is now not the momentum available to cause collapse under its own weight.

There is much more of this evidence. Observe with fresh eyes. I will provide what I can also.

Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk

The prosecution rests.