15 years of deception; 9/11 reviewed

[Alpo]

You can label something as you see fit. It is all in your reality warp.

The FACT is that there is more than adequate video evidence on youtube to support what I have said. Sorry. You just don't get it.

As to Chandler, you forgot to look at this video.

[video=youtube_share;1rhY9c_iemA]http://youtu.be/1rhY9c_iemA[/video]

 

[NKBJ]

Investigating a crime and avoiding motive. Funny.

 

[ATM]

You can label something as you see fit. It is all in your reality warp.

The FACT is that there is more than adequate video evidence on youtube to support what I have said. Sorry. You just don't get it.

Finished. You found the exit a few times already, I trust you can find it again.

As to Chandler, you forgot to look at this video.

[video=youtube_share;1rhY9c_iemA]http://youtu.be/1rhY9c_iemA[/video]

I didn't forget, you took 6 months to follow up on that failure. This was it?

The top comment on that video sounds vaguely familiar:

and ONE more thing. riddle me this, how come chandlers findings were compelling enough for NIST to change its findings and admit free-fall was achieved? hmmmmm? but somehow u think you found something that NIST couldn't find to refute Chandlers evidence? LOL what a joke! you people that religiously support the governments official conspiracy are in the minority! and more and more people everyday are seeing through the governments lies!

Bye.

 

[Alpo]

You're leaving the thread? Thank GOD!

In the event you didn't mean that the way you think you meant it,

Chandler was debunked near the beginning of this thread and you bring up an hour video by him NOW...and then expect someone to view it and find the nuggets you think exist within.

Sorry, your broad sweeping gestures do not work for engineers and scientists. But we know you have no evidence, only accusations.

Doddering attempts at relevance, what?

 

[KJQ6945]

That guy must have photoshopped it. I don't believe anything NIST said, other than freefall. That makes it fact!

 

[KJQ6945]

You're leaving the thread? Thank GOD!

In the event you didn't mean that the way you think you meant it,

Chandler was debunked near the beginning of this thread and you bring up an hour video by him NOW...and then expect someone to view it and find the nuggets you think exist within.

Sorry, your broad sweeping gestures do not work for engineers and scientists. But we know you have no evidence, only accusations.

Doddering attempts at relevance, what?

Do the adults get to discuss this now? Off to the kiddie table with the tin foil hatters.
Crawl away and declare victory.

 

[ATM]

That was it? Your best? Couldn't muster anything?

Ouch. Again.

 

[jamil]

You haven't said anything. You just declared victory. Do you have anything peer reviewed? Anything credible?

 

[ATM]

You haven't said anything. You just declared victory. Do you have anything peer reviewed? Anything credible?

You, too?

Just keep saying stuff like that instead of responding to the refutations of your own weak crap. Leave all that unanswered and just pretend to still have some purpose lingering in this thread except possibly to console others who never became relevant, either.

 

[KJQ6945]

You haven't said anything. You just declared victory. Do you have anything peer reviewed? Anything credible?

Anything credible? What, are you new here?

 

[Alpo]

 

[ATM]

I thought a few of you already had.

What are you guys still doing chattering about abandoning the thread after you already abandoned your points?

This would be a good time to just go ahead and take your own advice, I'm not sure what else you'd stick around for.

Make a new thread if you just want to console each other and pretend none of this happened with others who didn't fare any better in this one.

Seriously, what's stopping you?

Bye.

 

[churchmouse]

This has ran it's course.
At least for a while.
Take a break and we will resume in a day or so.

Maybe.

 

[jamil]

You, too?

Just keep saying stuff like that instead of responding to the refutations of your own weak crap. Leave all that unanswered and just pretend to still have some purpose lingering in this thread except possibly to console others who never became relevant, either.

Okay. So I'll take it that you have nothing peer reviewed. Nothing credible to support the wild claim of controlled demolition other than some senile old ****'s video claiming to see things that aren't there. Weak? Dude the only thing you've posted from strength is your own ego.

So anyway, you keep saying no one tested NIST's findings. Are you certain? Have you looked everywhere? Have you even looked? Or have you just taken the word of old senile bat**** crazy tinfoil hat wearing fools because you like that outcome better than the other.

Oh, and I will get around to reading your last filibuster to me. Doutful that it contains anything new or important.

 

[JollyMon]

 

[JollyMon]

 

[JollyMon]

 

[ghuns]

 

[jamil]

I'm afraid it can't.

 

[JollyMon]