BAHAHAHA
So there was a second Spitter??
Back and to the left
Back and to the left
Back and to the left
Back and to the left
BAHAHAHA
So there was a second Spitter??
Why do you refuse to say what you think?
What the is wrong with you people?
BitLord and eMule have many seeders.
WTF? You can download it from Google Video and watch it on their player in five minutes.
This Chump Dumper guy has talent he really knows how to push buttons.
Those are Bit Torrent Clients. Where are the torrents?
Quote:
That is not that slow, I waited 5 days to see Blood DiamondOriginally Posted by VIVA_LAS_ESPUELAS
Cool. I found In Plane Sight on Demonoid. There's no seeders though. It's showing that it'll complete in 2 days. Oh well.
Let me know when you see the movie I have a few questions about it. Your going to like the film they seem to be very open minded and they don't try to bash anyone or talk about things that are not true in some sort of way.
You want the links?
Chump has a point about you can just watch them with Google
http://video.google.com/videosearch?...-8&sa=N&tab=wv
That does not take 5 minutes and if your PC was that fast? you would be working for NORAD.
Then why have you not seen the film yet?
Though there are many serious questions and mysteries yet to be answered on the tragic events of September 11, 2001.... there are also many 9/11 conspiracy arguments which have been shreddred to bits... and by actual experts (Civil engineers, Mechanical engineers, Fire Chiefs, Physicists, Metallurgical gurus, Architects, etc...).
I don't understand why many of the conspiracy theorists continue to use those flawed arguments and then expect serious responses in return. In fact, many of the conspiracy arguments that initially surfaced were rash conclusions based on analyses of limited evidence, or from contextual opinions relayed from 'eye-witness' accounts - some more credible than others. They were hardly thought out, or 'irrefutable'... so even when it appears that much thought went into the formulation of an argument... key engineering principles are ignored (blatantly or ignorantly - you decide). The continued use of those arguments therefore deflates their movement and detracts our attention away from the more important issues at hand.
Ten, and I've got cheap ass DSL.I saw it, then saw the video I linked that blew it out of the water in thirty seconds and read a couple of more sites that finished it off.Then why have you not seen the film yet?
Done and done.
So, what do you think happened?
So lets just ask the original hegamboa: Do you think building seven collapsed the way the government told us it collapsed, or do you think otherwise?
Why would anyone give a about the other buildings surrounding WTC7 and therefore desire to control the collapse so carefully? Why haven't any of the firemen who "knew" the building was going to be imploded come forward since then? Furthermore, all anyone would have to do is damage it so it would be condemned to get the insurance money -- the debris and the fires took care of that.
And from where did Silverstien launch his cruise missile at the Pentagon? His yacht?
Once again, the next 9/11 conspiracy theorist I meet who has a degree in structural engineering will be the first.
Gee, I wonder why no one in the M$M got the story from the firemen there.
Oh wait -- they did.
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...ki_Richard.txt
Wait, there's more!http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...gro_Daniel.txt
Not done yet!http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...an_William.txt
Had enough? I knew you didn't.http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/9.../gz/boyle.html
Funny how none of them mentions the building was going to be brought down by explosives.
You want firemen who witnessed explosions before the collapse?
What Happened To Building 7? Part 2
The whole video is interesting, but go to 5.35 for firemen and secondary explosions
Gee, high rise buildings on fire for hours, that have electrical transformers and diesel backup generators in them -- Nothing could possibly explode in there, could it?
Thank God you got a Theology professor as an expert on building demolition.
I won't even go into the mathematical improbability of 3 building collapsing a near free fall speed. Believe what you want, but there is a greater probability of Dubya's surge working in Iraq than the manner in which these building collapsed happening without a demolition, even if they did sustain enough structural damage.
How are all the armchair scientists doing today?
Still pretending that you can apply "common sense" to structural engineering to create elaborate conspiracy theories eh?
Where's the Bad Astronomy (http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html) version of 9/11? You know, written by someone that actually knows what they are talking about?
I could stand in front of a video camera and pretend I know what I'm talking about too. I could go to google.com and type in "melting point of steel" then type "structural fire burning temperature" and bam, instant conspiracy theory. Of course I know structural engineering is much much more complex and involves heavy physics and high end calculus to actually determine these things.
But of course, being logical makes too much sense now a days.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)