conspiracy theories

[pinoy_09]

---

Naa may 3 ka Conspiracy theory ani!

1.Is controlled demolition ang naka guba sa Twin Towers.

2.Katong mga hi-jackers,kay CIA trained to sila.

3.Terrorist gyud to sila unya nakabalo na ang US ato.Unya ila lang gipasagdahan.

lay out the evidence here... para nindot ang estorya matud pa ni soul doctor.

[eternitycontract]

so you're trying to imply nga gi plant ang bomba sa sud sa WTC? dugay naman na gi disprove nga "theory" sa mga demolition experts. ang kana imong makita nga ni buto sa lain laing part sa building as if mura xag controlled demolition, ang explanation sa mga experts ana is ang mga metal na nga ga support sa building---wala na kasugakod.

tanang "evidence" sa mga conspiracy theorists nga naay bomba sa WTC dugay rana gi DISPROVE sa mga demolition experts.

oh sorry ni apil rako sa mga late posts about the 9/11 issue kay mao ra akong nabasahan dri. gidisprove na sa mga demolition experts pero ang mga evidence sa mga taw nga naa ngad2 nagtan.aw sa mga demolition experts gipansin na d.i nila? ok.. but how come sa mga time nga panghitabo pajud ana lain man ang gisulti sa mga government officials/authorities/og Mass Media nga nahitabo kaysa sa late nga explanations sa demolition experts? late naman gud ni gawas ang explanations sa demolition people sukad atong mga panghitabo jud, basahon pa nako ang explanations nila and see if na disprove ba jud.

[pantaleon]

lay out the evidence here... para nindot ang estorya matud pa ni soul doctor.

The evidence? So that you can deny it? This thread is all about acceptance and denial.The argument will just continue!

[pinoy_09]

oh sorry ni apil rako sa mga late posts about the 9/11 issue kay mao ra akong nabasahan dri. gidisprove na sa mga demolition experts pero ang mga evidence sa mga taw nga naa ngad2 nagtan.aw sa mga demolition experts gipansin na d.i nila? ok.. but how come sa mga time nga panghitabo pajud ana lain man ang gisulti sa mga government officials/authorities/og Mass Media nga nahitabo kaysa sa late nga explanations sa demolition experts? late naman gud ni gawas ang explanations sa demolition people sukad atong mga panghitabo jud, basahon pa nako ang explanations nila and see if na disprove ba jud.

studying and researching the cause of the explosions or "implosions" like what you "theorists" like to term it, takes a while and is not done overnight.

tell me, which one is more reliable, information that is spread overnight or one that is meticulously studied and researched? i think i'd go for the latter.

[pinoy_09]

The evidence? So that you can deny it? This thread is all about acceptance and denial.The argument will just continue!

deny what? the facts? there's no denying the facts. if it's not fact, then of course i'll deny it! i'm all for facts my friend.

[pantaleon]

deny what? the facts? there's no denying the facts. if it's not fact, then of course i'll deny it! i'm all for facts my friend.

How do you define facts anyway?

[eternitycontract]

studying and researching the cause of the explosions or "implosions" like what you "theorists" like to term it, takes a while and is not done overnight.

tell me, which one is more reliable, information that is spread overnight or one that is meticulously studied and researched? i think i'd go for the latter.

oh mao sad akong gihuna2 dli sa nako basahon kay kapoy pa taas kaayo. . isave rto nako ang link nga gihatag hehe.

mmm about kung asa ang mas reliable, depende manjud na noh. kung ang info nga ni spread kay sa direct witnesses jud sa panghitabo gikan or kung ang info nga meticulously studied and researched jud Paghuman na sa mga panghitabo. i want to be openminded on this matter cause i havent given enough attention jud aning 9/11 issue kay mas nagresearch man ko bout lain nga mga conspiracy. ug para nako sa kadaghan na nga mga conspiracy nga na prove jud dli na angay magduda. hehe.. bati sad kay ang akong naresearch about sa 9/11 kay ang side ra sa Govt ug Mass media vs conspiracy theorists nya wa pko kabasa sa late explanations sa demolition people nga na ngad2..

[Soul Doctor]

Their DEBUNKING is UNSATSFACTORY ? WHy is it so ? UNless you read the link the I provided then I dont know which one are you talking about na UNSAT siya .



Ok show me why it is CRAP . Here is the link :

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - World Trade Center 7, Building 7

Just give it a shot , a one time big shot . Just make sure that it is from your own understanding because you are now in the verge of DEBUNKING the EXPERTIES of the REAL EXPERTS here otherwise kinkoy paminawn but hey , why not ? if you can debunk them then the better right doc ?

basically you are saying that the building 7 was destroyed by fire based on the account of the fireman named Richard Banaciski?

lets start
(this is from the link: )

As for Building 7 and the evidence for Controlled Demolition, let's review the evidence...

What we do have for sure.

1) Fireman saying there was "a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors." "I would say it was probably about a third of it".

http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7_Smoke.jpg
http://www.debunking911.com/Bankers.jpg

as you can see from the pictures, the building is standing and there are no fire anymore.
so
how can you say that the building collapsed because of its damaged caused by a big fire in the building.

and please take note of this.

the whole area as shown in the picture was covered with dust.
everything is painted in dust.
where did all of those dust came from?.

if those dust came from the fire, then dust could only be carried by the smoke and the wind.
but notice the whole area was covered in dust where do you see a scene like this?
the wind did not blow in a 360 direction!
Remember mount pinatubo?
it looks exactly like an explosion from a volcano.

1.) fire could not turn concrete to dust. in fact if you see building damaged by fire, its the concrete that survives the fire (case for example White Gold House sa reclamation)
2.) if fire cause the building to collapse then you will see that concrete walls and slabs will be turn to rubbles but not dust.
broken bits of concrete not pulverized cement,
and these rubble and broken bits of cement will fall on the ground not blown out ALL OVER THE PLACE to cover a huge area..

We are talking about the DUST now.

Where did all these dust came from and what cause this dust.
The volume of the dust is equal to the volume of the concrete that was originally in the buildings.
So what turns all these concrete walls into dust?
The concrete floor----turned to dust
The concrete walls-----turned to dust
Do we need another expert to answer that?
Can we not use our common sense just to answer simple questions like these?
Do we need to research and meticulous study to explain this?
DEBUNK THAT!

is the link satisfactory to you?
obviously someone was paid to make those so called Debunks.
but please use your common sense this time.
can you really believe what they are saying?

To all who are against the conspiracy theory:

the ball is in your court now.
Debunk the Dust theory!

[Gac]

i hate conspiracy theories except these 3.

but these 3 conspiracy theories that are somehow connected
and allegedly committed by the same group of people.

1.) the us astronauts to the moon, a hoax.
2.) the jfk assassination.
3.) the 911 terrorist attack.

take your pick.

nice pik doc.. doc.... u think that C.T. is really true... thanks......

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

basically you are saying that the building 7 was destroyed by fire based on the account of the fireman named Richard Banaciski?

DEBUNK that ? Where did the dust came from ? Obviously sa rubbles pag hugno .

Also , I am not saying anything . The EXPERTS did , people who know more than us , who were there personally to witness and investigate . Unlike us who only based on pictures that speaks a thousand words according to you and cram on 2 minute YOUTUBE VIDEOS . Did you even take note when ni mga tuiga gi himo ang VIDEO na gi post nimo like LOOSE CHANGE ? This is like 2004 or 2005 and was DEBUNKED that same year !!

If you still insist that you have QUESTIONS na wala pa na DEBUNK , then it is obvious that you havent READ it . Take time doc . It will save you time in the long run because of asking qustions here instead , you will keep it to yourself or share here the answers yourself after you read the site I gave you .

If you really want discussion , look for similar topics that existed deep in the pages of this forum and utilize the SEARCH ENGINE . I gave my piece there .

The DUST THEORY ? or DOC's DUST THEORY ? Your DUST THEORY is moot because regardless of the dust or not , the TOWER 7 was never been a DEMOLITION JOB . And that is the CONSPIRACY THEORY , not your DUST THEORY . Maysad ka doc .

Is it SATISFACTORY ? Hell yeah it is way more than SATISFACTORY !! Bilib sad ko nimo doc da .