Bombings at the Boston Marathon
Posted by: Hook on 15 April 2013
Today's headline...
(CNN) -- Two bombs struck near the finish line of the Boston Marathon on Monday, turning a celebration into a bloody scene of destruction.
The blasts threw people to the ground, killing two and injuring dozens.
Hospitals reported at least 110 people being treated, at least eight of them in critical condition and 14 in serious condition. At least eight of the patients are children.
Our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims and their family members.
Let us hope that those responsible for these cowardly acts of violence are soon brought to justice.
I was so sickened and shocked by the WTC attacks that past feeling very numb about it, I didn't follow the media feeding frenzy which followed.
I haven't had my head up my back side but I must say that some of this material casts serious doubt on what I thought I knew. The third tower, seldom referred to or remembered widely presents strong enough evidence to debunk everything else. Never mind the main towers.
Not that we'll ever know.
I didn't follow the media feeding frenzy which followed.
............... but I must say that some of this material casts serious doubt on what I thought I knew. The third tower, seldom referred to or remembered widely presents strong enough evidence to debunk everything else. Never mind the main towers.
I disagree. The reference given by Sniper and the architects leading the organisation seeking the so called "truth" are easilly challenged by other web-links. Even the "truth seakers" admit that "it doesn't take an expert to see what happened.....etc"
But each to his own. If you want to believe in a conspiracy, then go ahead.
Cheers
Don
It''s not belief in anything. It's the evidence presented. A wide peer reviewed and critically scrutinised study is called for.The opinions and evidence outlined calls for one OMO. But that's just my opinion.
It''s not belief in anything. It's the evidence presented. A wide peer reviewed and critically scrutinised study is called for.The opinions and evidence outlined calls for one OMO. But that's just my opinion.
I think a controlled demolition of these looney conspiracy theories grants them too much credence.
We should focus mankinds efforts on actually putting a man on the moon. He could then confirm if Elvis is in fact living there. G
LOL Graeme.
A nice light hearted touch
More debunking. A lot more. No comment about the special, silent explosives, though...
http://www.popularmechanics.co...s-world-trade-center
http://www.popularmechanics.co...architecture/4278874
even got a video...
http://www.popularmechanics.com/video/#v1745050112
The trailer was very interesting, my recollection was of one pro-conspiricy interviewee saying something like "you don't need to be an expert to see....." kinda sums up the situation do you think ? - so i'll give it a miss this time round.
If a non-expert says "you don't need to be an expert to see....." I might be concerned but when an expert says it I am not. 2,000 experts all way more qualified than you Don.
Meanwhile, I do recall three cooling towers at Ferrybridge collapsing in strong winds in c.1965. They didn't fall over sideways under wind pressure as you (being an expert) might expect. Each one kinda fell, more or less within its own footprint. No aeroplane, no fuel, no carefully placed explosives, just a "puff" of wind and - kapow! They actually seemed to fall in a more "controlled" maner than the ones at Calder Hall a few years back wich were the subject of a controlled demolition.
Were these cooling towers designed to withstand an airplane collision? Were they steel framed? Did they have multiple floors supported by columns? And did they collapse in free fall as if there were no columns to support the multiple floors?
Nooo. So what is your point exactly?
I wonder how many of the 2,000 experts believe in faked moon landing and Elvis Lives? I would suggest none. Not one.
You make the snide remarks because you have no argument. None.
More debunking. A lot more. No comment about the special, silent explosives, though...
http://www.popularmechanics.co...s-world-trade-center
http://www.popularmechanics.co...architecture/4278874
even got a video...
http://www.popularmechanics.com/video/#v1745050112
TMP,
Thanks, I will look at these links as I am happy to change my view for evidence.
Actually I share Harry's view 'It''s not belief in anything. It's the evidence presented. A wide peer reviewed and critically scrutinised study is called for.The opinions and evidence outlined calls for one OMO. But that's just my opinion'.
I don't ignore evidence that does not support my view.
what is your point exactly?
My point is :-
The trailer to the film doesn't inspire any confidence in the team of so called experts.
When an "expert" says "you don't need to be an expert to see....." she's either not an expert or she's making it expressly clear that my view (and yours) are equally as valid as her's.
A quick look via Google reveals many real experts, taking time to explain what Richard Gage and his team have not managed to properly understand.
cheers
Don
what is your point exactly?
My point is :-
The trailer to the film doesn't inspire any confidence in the team of so called experts.
Oh dear, you really are a chump. My question 'what is your point exactly' relates to your nonsense re. cooling towers. This is clear.
As for the trailer, how about watching the whole film instead of judging a book by it's cover so to speak?
The fact is, you made up your mind based on no evidence whatsoever. All you do is check online to see if anyone has attempted a rebuttal which I doubt you have read or read with understanding because, as you admit, you have not studied the original material. Personally, I keep an open mind and I check the rebuttals and rebuttals of the rebuttals. I have no attachment to my view and I am happy to be proved wrong but you won't even watch the film, Your mind is made up. You think because you have some knowledge of structural engineering (which you have not proved) and demolitions, (which you have not proved and which is highly doubtful given that you have tried unsuccessfully to link the way some cooling towers collapsed to the way the WTC towers collapsed when there are no similarities in design construction at all) that you know more than 2,000 experts in a variety of disciplines (including, but limited to, structural engineering and demolitions) and that therefore you, the great Don, knows best. It is beneath you to look at the evidence because you are a superior being. The qualifications and credentials of each and every expert are clearly made and they all - all of them - way more qualified than you Don.
"I wonder how many of the 2,000 experts believe in faked moon landing and Elvis Lives? I would suggest none. Not one."
But maybe Elvis landed on the moon and lives there? 
But maybe Elvis landed on the moon and lives there?
more than 2,000 experts in a variety of disciplines (including, but limited to, structural engineering and demolitions)
<snip>
. The qualifications and credentials of each and every expert are clearly made and they all - all of them - way more qualified than you Don.
..except the claim that 2000 "experts" agreed with this has been shown to be wrong - even when it was 1900 experts, and just after the figure was about 1200. They simply did not say what you try to tell us they said.
Can you show us this claim, by the way?
Not only are you inflating the figures, you're ignoring the carefully-framed rebuttals of the original fibs.
Witness 'Unstoppable Force vs Immovable Object' here on this very thread. This could run and run. G
Sniper,
On the basis that I haven't watched a specific movie selected by yourself, you feel you can pour out expletives - but nothing else.
There are plenty of summaries of your cherished conspiracy theory and just as many well-founded rebutals of this theory. These, together with my own knowledge of structures and demolition leads me to my current conclusion that 9/11 was not a pre-planned, inside job.
As and when new evidence has been presented over the past few years, I considered it and took account of it and will continue to do so. Who knows what the future might bring. But based on the current information, I don't consider it is justified to invest public resources to re-examine the evidence.
Cheers
Don
more than 2,000 experts in a variety of disciplines (including, but limited to, structural engineering and demolitions)
<snip>
. The qualifications and credentials of each and every expert are clearly made and they all - all of them - way more qualified than you Don.
..except the claim that 2000 "experts" agreed with this has been shown to be wrong - even when it was 1900 experts, and just after the figure was about 1200. They simply did not say what you try to tell us they said.
Can you show us this claim, by the way?
Not only are you inflating the figures, you're ignoring the carefully-framed rebuttals of the original fibs.
I am not inflating anything I merely quoted the numbers that were given in various youtube films some of which have been updated - the older ones quoted less membership and the newer ones quoted higher membership. I expect you will find this is due to the fact that membership is increasing over time.
I have not seen any relevant rebuttals with any merit as yet. I live in hope though. I have not yet had a chance to see your videos from 'popular mechanic'.
Sniper,
On the basis that I haven't watched a specific movie selected by yourself, you feel you can pour out expletives - but nothing else.
There are plenty of summaries of your cherished conspiracy theory and just as many well-founded rebutals of this theory. These, together with my own knowledge of structures and demolition leads me to my current conclusion that 9/11 was not a pre-planned, inside job.
As and when new evidence has been presented over the past few years, I considered it and took account of it and will continue to do so. Who knows what the future might bring. But based on the current information, I don't consider it is justified to invest public resources to re-examine the evidence.
Cheers
Don
Don,
I have not poured out expletives and my view is not cherished. You just seek to deflect from the fact that you are out of your depth here. The fact is your cooling towers can not in any way be compared with the WTC towers and the fact you think they are comparable shows you know little or nothing about structural engineering and demolitions at all. And (bizarrely) you don't need to be an expert to see that.
For my part, I'd prefer to know that 9/11 was NOT an inside job. I did not even want to watch the film but I was pestered into doing so. I would not bet my life on 9/11 being an inside job or even a modest sum of money but one thing I am absolutely sure of - a full independent investigation MUST take place no matter what the cost.
I am not inflating anything I merely quoted the numbers that were given in various youtube films some of which have been updated - the older ones quoted less membership and the newer ones quoted higher membership. I expect you will find this is due to the fact that membership is increasing over time.
I have not seen any relevant rebuttals with any merit as yet. I live in hope though. I have not yet had a chance to see your videos from 'popular mechanic'.
Can you show us the source, please, rather than simply saying "they exist"?
If you've not understood the rebuttals, thats your problem, not mine. The Wikipedia article I included a while ago had many, many sources that shot down the conspiracy theory as well as pointing out that AT NO TIME did 1200 / 1900 / 2000 "professionals" say that explosives ( even the special, silent ones that would have had to have been used ) where used.
Source, please.
Over to you.
I am not inflating anything I merely quoted the numbers that were given in various youtube films some of which have been updated - the older ones quoted less membership and the newer ones quoted higher membership. I expect you will find this is due to the fact that membership is increasing over time.
I have not seen any relevant rebuttals with any merit as yet. I live in hope though. I have not yet had a chance to see your videos from 'popular mechanic'.
Can you show us the source, please, rather than simply saying "they exist"?
If you've not understood the rebuttals, thats your problem, not mine. The Wikipedia article I included a while ago had many, many sources that shot down the conspiracy theory as well as pointing out that AT NO TIME did 1200 / 1900 / 2000 "professionals" say that explosives ( even the special, silent ones that would have had to have been used ) where used.
Source, please.
Over to you.
The source is the film that I supplied links to (twice). Also there are many videos of people being interviewed who say they heard explosions. This is the danger of reading rebuttals but ignoring the original material. You could not get away with that at a university.
The source is the film that I supplied links to (twice).
Your source is a film and you expect to be taken seriously??
Are you five years old??
Also there are many videos of people being interviewed who say they heard explosions.
No there aren't.
This is the danger of reading rebuttals but ignoring the original material. You could not get away with that at a university.
Indeed.
To twist the idea of "Intelligent Design" -
what was gained by whatever-the-conspiracy-added that justified the additional risk of detection over - just letting the terrorist plan play out?
If believed, you seem to end up with a group of conspirators both devilishly ingenious and monumentally stupid.
It's all a bit too much like super-intelligent beings travelling light years to probe the rectums of humanity's dullest representatives.
But maybe Elvis landed on the moon and lives there?
Nice comeback!
(But he's a liar & I'm not sure about you.)
The source is the film that I supplied links to (twice).
Your source is a film and you expect to be taken seriously??
Are you five years old??
Also there are many videos of people being interviewed who say they heard explosions.
No there aren't.
This is the danger of reading rebuttals but ignoring the original material. You could not get away with that at a university.
Indeed.
If I say there are - there are. You can bet your life on it.
No, I don't expect to be taken seriously. I have put very few arguments forward because I'd have to watch the film again and I can't be bothered. I expect the experts to be taken seriously and the 2 films I provided links to are but introductions to the subject matter, albeit in depth 2 hour long introductions. You prefer wikipedia and Popular Mechanic. I am not sure when Wikepedia became the final word on anything. My mechanic in the UK is a popular mechanic although he is barely literate. Anyway, I will dig into your rebuttals when I get the chance.
"It's all a bit too much like super-intelligent beings travelling light years to probe the rectums of humanity's dullest representatives. "
Adam: I had sworn off this thread forever, but your above post was too rich to pass up. I would risk saying that I am sure I have known some folks who would be instant candidates for examination by your hypothetical space-travelers--except that I myself have noticed my own share of rectal itching lately. Great post.
Best regards,
Russ