Can't answer the question can you? I'm not surprised.

What Question?
The "Questions" you ask are impossible to answer in this here Dimension!

Actually I already did but since it contained some science, it must have been way over your head. I wasn't ranting about trolls. I was pointing them out. Just like the explosives theory, you are incapable of understanding any part of reality.

As I have pointed out earlier, the entire thread is a troll thread and was created solely for the purpose of ranting and ridiculing anyone who does not agree with the official conspiracy theory of the US government or who ever owns the media.

Oh that's right, pro-Zionists and neo-cons mostly control the Media.

And you have never, to my knowledge, explained anything about how a pancake collapse could melt and rust 1400-1600 cars located blocks away, and to date I have not found any 'official' explanation for that, scientific or otherwise.

You continue to pretend that no human on the planet can understand the 'science.' (but you apparently)and you love love pretending that you do.

If any other expert or scientist offers their hypothesis you and your club pounce upon the messenger as if you knew what their qualifications are. You continually do that to every other mingle member who disagrees with you, expounding on how ignorant they are of 'science' and how your expert opinion is the only one that matters.

You have done this over and over and over. And that is a fact.

If you read my posts you would know the question.

The official story is that an airplane hit the tower and that somehow (very scientifically) caused the entire building to weaken and totally collapse into dust. The claim is that the building fell in what is described as a PANCAKE COLLAPSE, which is one story fell onto another story and caused it to fall because of the weight and the weakness.

Now, if one accepts that hypothesis, the QUESTION IS how did 1400 - 1600 cars, blocks away manage to have melted engine blocks, melted doors, some with melted or missing door handles, some with missing glass and all of the were rusted over night.

THE QUESTION in this dimension is how did a pancake collapse cause that kind of damage?

That question.

Are we clear?

There are literally thousands of unanswered questions in the entire event of 9-11 that have not and will never be answered by either experts or investigators. Even independent investigators are stopped and told that everything is "classified."

IF the official version of 9-11 has all been figured out and wrapped up, and the official version has determined who is responsible for it, then why is the information still being hidden and 'classified?'

It would take hundreds of investigators to follow leads in many different directions to answer even a small amount of these unanswered questions about 9-11. People you insist on making fun of, still want the truth.

The facts are that you have shown yourself incapable of understanding even the simplest scientific explanations of anything. The facts are that you post lies about everything in an attempt to disparage science in any way you can. The facts are that I knew more science by the age of 20 than you could ever hope of knowing in your life. The facts are that I am an actual expert in the matters that deal with how the buildings fell and the mingles that know me outside the threads (a lot of them) know that fact well.

I don't know what caused your venomous hatred of science and frankly don't care, but it was probably due to the fact they you are so incapable of understanding any of it, that it has given you a serious inferiority complex. You are constantly trying to elevate your "opinions" to the level of actual science. You can't.

If you want to impress with your vast knowledge of the events at 9/11, go look up and describe the noiseless, lightless explosive that was used. If you want to know how the buildings fell, I posted, in my own words, the failure mode analysis on the event. I also posted the chemical alkyd reaction of the building's ash with water. I guessed you missed all of that, not that it would have mattered. You wouldn't understand it anyway.

There are plenty of folks at Mingle who understand the science and my explanations just fine. You just don't understand any of it.

1400-1500 cars with melted engine blocks?

Where do you find these fantasies?

Please tell us what actually happened, and be specific.

No, this thread is to expose the truther stupidity that floods the internet. Mingle has enough people posting threads from truthers that mock anyone who doesn't believe their specious and nonsensical hypotheses, so it was about time someone showed the movement for the idiocy it really is. It's called 'balance' and it's done to offset a barrage of one-sided and simplistic material. I'm a member of many sites and I read some absolute drivel, so to collect these so-called 'thoughts' and musing gives people some idea of the mentality of the movement. I have the same thread running on another site and the contributions and responses are fascinating.



More wild accusations.



Your figures are exaggerated, and it has been explained. Try looking for the explanation somewhere other than twoofer sites.



No, he states that YOU don't understand the science and he is correct. It is self-evident he knows what he is talking about and his experience and education in science are far superior to my own. What were you saying about 'attacking the messenger'? And yet, you know nothing of his qualifications or background.



Oh, please. Stop telling lies for once and ask a few questions like we do. You come on here with crazy ideas, lobbing unfounded accusations at all and sundry, and denigrate those who don't follow your puerile diatribes. FFS!



You think Mingle is the only site with people who discuss this? You are just an amateur, who knows little science, very little about media operation or history, and no idea of how to research source material and examine the author's credentials, and yet, you accuse those who are capable of these disciplines of 'attacking the messenger'. If the messenger lacks the qualifications and the message is ridiculous, I will ask questions, it's what educated people do.

Please post documentary evidence to support this claim. Something independent if you please-not Woods.



No, a fire would do that.







Steel oxidises rapidly after exposure to intense heat.

Duh... it was a PARKING LOT for crap sake. You want documentary evidence of a New York parking lot? That's funny. People who worked down town parked there cars there. It can be seen in countless photos anywhere.

And there was no blazing three block fire engulfing buildings or cars. New York was NOT a blaze with FIRE. No "pancake collapse" could have caused that kind of damage to that many cars, not to mention caused them to rust over night.

Also, the pictures on Judy woods website are real pictures taken by real people and also some were taken by satellite and she has more real pictures than anyone else that I have seen. I have on my computer a very large detailed satellite picture of the entire area from space.

I use Judy wood's pictures because she has the best collection of pictures out there. (The government or its media whores certainly did not provide that kind of coverage.)

Just because you don't agree with her hypothesis that does not mean you can imply that her pictures are not credible.

This entire thread is still a very low class "troll thread" and in poor taste with an agenda of ridicule and propaganda towards what you feel are a bunch of crazy theories about 9-11. (A scientist with any dignity at all would not even bother to participate in this thread.)

That's all you got? What intense heat are you talking about? Did you see any burned people? Any reason this intense heat forgot to burn the paper flying around all over the place? So this alleged intense heat melted steel on the cars, melted the inside of a van and not the outside? Melted and rusted only parts of a car but not the rest? Seriously?

What boggles my mind is that within a week after hurricane Sandy there was a full length news media approved 'documentary' about it. WITHIN A WEEK for crap sake. Lots of pictures, lots of interviews.

And the attack on the trade center? NADA. Where is the media approved full length documentary about that? Where are the interviews of all the witnesses at ground zero? NO WHERE TO BE FOUND.

Except what you can find on Youtube from independent investigators.

I understand reality just fine. The reality is I don't believe you and I don't think you know what you are talking about. If you are so smart, then say something convincing.

And stop ranting about how I don't understand science. I understand enough to know that the official conspiracy theory and account of 9-11 is absurd, and involves a cover-up of major proportions.

Even a troll could figger out that noiseless, lightless explosives don't exist and hundreds of cameras and microphones were focused on the buildings on 9/11. Prove you can understand anything other than "aliens with dustification beams must have done it." But being a troll, the troll would never admit the truth or it would cease being a troll.

In this thread I have not hypothesized much of anything other than that the official account of 9-11 is all wrong and that a major cover-up is involved. On the list of many different "conspiracy theories" it is one of the most unbelievable.

I have read and considered other possibilities only because the official account has been rejected by most rational minds including my own.

I don't care to get into a pointless debate with you on any of the details of 9-11. You only want to toss insults and ridicule around inside of a thread that is clearly for that purpose alone.

(As far as your claim that the towers came down "noiselessly with no lights," that has not been proven. --And I have seen videos of what appear to be small explosions (and lights) on building 7 and on the twin towers, so I can't rule out the possibility that these were explosives.)

I'm sure you will claim that they are faked, but I'm not so certain about that. It doesn't matter anyway, your mind is made up and closed shut.

I don't care.

See, you can't even grasp the simplest concepts. Noiseless, lightless explosives don't exist. That means that real explosives would have shown on film and their sounds would have been recorded WHICH THEY WERE NOT, which proves beyond any shadow of doubt that explosives were not used and that you cannot follow the simplest trail of logic.

I know, please don't take that tone. I meant please provide documentary evidence that the cars weren't towed there, that they are 'in situ'. Oh, and please provide the same for the figure of 1400-1500 cars. I suppose this is the usual evasive technique I've become so familiar with.



I know, please stop raving and making crazy assumptions. I never said any such thing (as usual).



So, you can prove the location of these with independent documentary evidence? Then do so and stop ranting. If you spent as much time trying to prove your points as you do belittling others, someone might take you seriously.



I'm sure you do.



I never said anything about pictures, you're lying again. It's her hypotheses that are insane.



Oh, please stop whining and making false accusations. Just try to prove something reasonably just for a change FFS!

It's true. Are you unaware of this basic fact?





I'm talking about the testimony of the firefighters I posted earlier. I suppose you didn't read that. On the same note, what did you make of the independent analysis of the samples that disproved the use of thermitic material? Or didn't you read that one either?

So, after spending x amount of posts telling us how wrong we are (regarding the cars etc.), what scientific hypothesis do you have on the subject?

Argument from incredulity: Logical fallacy.