Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on May 7, 2019 21:11:32 GMT -5
Which parts of NIST were erroneous? Cite examples. I already have-- about 20 times. How did the NIST pretend to explain the observed symmetrical free fall collapse of WTC7? (Hint: They didn't.) Have you read Hoffman's detailed debunking of the NIST scam-- posted above on this thread? Yes or no? Yes, that was the first one I read that you recommended. It was total bullshit. If you cannot understand the report, (and it is clear you don't), and need to rely on some dumbass to tell you what to think, then that is on you. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2019 21:23:23 GMT -5
I already have-- about 20 times. How did the NIST pretend to explain the observed symmetrical free fall collapse of WTC7? (Hint: They didn't.) Have you read Hoffman's detailed debunking of the NIST scam-- posted above on this thread? Yes or no? Yes, that was the first one I read that you recommended. It was total bullshit. If you cannot understand the report, (and it is clear you don't), and need to rely on some dumbass to tell you what to think, then that is on you. Oh, really? Explain the alleged "bullshit" in Hoffman's critique. As a former college physics instructor, I'm calling bullshit on your NIST bullshit. How did those PNAC-funded charlatans explain the abrupt, total free fall collapse of WTC7? |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by AlaCowboy on May 7, 2019 21:59:27 GMT -5
Where are the passengers that were on the planes that didn't crash into buildings on 9/11/2001? Produce even one for a live interview and you'll blow the lid off this conspiracy.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 15:03:36 GMT -5
Incredibly, Walter still hasn't figured out that the NIST computer "simulations" of the WTC demolitions are a pseudo-scientific fraud.
They refused to publish the "data" they used for their idiotic "pancake" model of the abrupt, symmetrical, complete collapse of these massive steel towers.
Walter has been completely suckered by the Bush-Cheney NIST cover up of the 9/11 explosive demolitions of the WTC -- including WTC7, which was never hit by a plane.
Some people will believe ANYTHING they are told by "authority" figures, however absurd.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Aug 12, 2019 15:13:14 GMT -5
Incredibly, Walter still hasn't figured out that the NIST computer "simulations" of the WTC demolitions are a pseudo-scientific fraud. They refused to publish the "data" they used for their idiotic "pancake" model of the abrupt, symmetrical, complete collapse of these massive steel towers. Walter has been completely suckered by the Bush-Cheney NIST cover up of the 9/11 explosive demolitions of the WTC -- including WTC7, which was never hit by a plane. Some people will believe ANYTHING they are told by "authority" figures, however absurd. You've never even read it. How would you know anything about what NIST says or doesn't say? ...oh, wait...right. My apologies... You read a 'scholarly thesis' written by some asshat on a clickbait conspiracy website that 'totally debunks' the NIST report whilst you seriously ponder the role that holograms may have played. My bad. LOL....carry on. |
|
