Lloyd England exposed was involved in 9/11 false flag event

Kingmob

You did not even correct me when i said you never watched this video.


You claim then I misrepresented NIST statements. 

Click the start button it is a ten-minute video and then show all why i was wrong. You just post long posts that don't debate the topic. Maybe its your style of writing and personality, but if you going to change my mind, I expect some genuine feedback about the videos I post.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

This is truther crap.

Multiple investigations found the buildings fell due to fire. Just because there is a "mistake" in one of the reports or an erroneous figure or an interviewer says something wrong (to an audience of nuts) that doesn't mean the conclusions are wrong, ergo it's all some fantastic conspiracy

I read reports daily in my field with dozens of mistakes, misrepresented figures, it doesn't mean the final conclusions are wrong.

This is such basic stuff, but you seem to have such difficulty comprehend it. You literally reject basic logic because it interferes with your belief in 911 being some sort of conspiracy

The melted steel is actual tangible physical evidence of a conspiracy.
Despite what you read temps inside WTC7 would only reach temps about 600c.
The fact FEMA found this occurred, make the truthers theories even more plausible. 

There only a few photographs left of the WTC7 steel condition after the collapse, this one large beam or girder, melting occurred.

There is clear demonstrate evidence, some steel members, started melting.

Even FEMA described a hot liquid formed during this hot corrosion attack. They claim corrosion because they're not sure if developed outside or inside building seven.

If they're a hot liquid of Iron- during the hot phase of the attack, then NIST statement there is no evidence of molten steel is a false account of the event!

Thermal images appear to show hot spikes of 500c to 600c a few days after 9/11. So how can the steel be rusting in the rubble for weeks when the melting point of steel is 1500c?

So FEMA claimed the sulfur, was associated with this event, in reducing the melting point of A36. There complication with this theory, FEMA does not give the portion of sulfur, where it appeared from , and they said further research is called for.  Can sulfur reduce the melting point of steel by 500c?

banie01 wrote: »

The repetition, the parroting and outright Gish galloping are actually tiresome.

What does any of the oft repeated and rebutted nonsense CS has spewed again all over this thread, have to do with Lloyd England?

Why is CS back to spamming threads with BS unrelated to thread topic?

It's a conspiracy forum- if you don't like the debate, head to international skeptics forum and debate over there, they are like minded people have fun.

banie01 wrote: »

The inverse of that thinking, is that you could also feel free to fúck off to pastures new and regale like minded people with your musings?

Is that not just as valid a resolution?

I know I Am right place to discuss conspiracies. There plenty of forums online where debunkers post their feelings about 9/11, so why you here?

banie01 wrote: »

Because I am curious as to what drives belief in unproven and indeed often unprovable beliefs.

How someone can reconcile rational belief with an unfounded belief in their own interpretation of evidence and information.
In particular when their practical understanding of science and scientific method is shown to be lacking.

I find the cognitive dissonance between on the one hand refuting actual scientific evidence and consensus, whilst on the other relying on fringe theory and pseudo-science to be quite fascinating.

The best place to see those behaviours on boards are the Christianity forums, where at least the irrational behaviour can be attributed to "Faith".
And here, where you single handedly persist in taking the contrary position not just in 9/11 but with Kennedy, UFO and every theory that takes your fancy.

It is from afar, like documentary evidence of a descent to madness.
Really interesting.

I'm old enough to look back when UFO believers and skeptics clashed online like this. The same stream of debunking language, that you and King mob, Dohnjoe write, is nothing original, I have observed it before.

Skeptics were just as horrible about UFO believe a decade ago, as you are now about 9/11. The mainstream consensus back then was UFO followers were all crazy people that needed locking up.

What passed since!

US Navy has now explained online different venues, US navy aviators are following objects in the sky that shatter all known sciences principles on earth.

The Skeptics are often wrong about the true realities of this world than they are right. The Skeptics were challenging men could never fly in man-made objects or get to the Moon in the past, but all that was thrust to the side when they got proven wrong.

Regards 9/11 and JFK.
They're nothing crazy about people conspiring to use an event for their own sinister purposes.  It has taken place in the past.  
I discuss things that are not solved. 

Dohnjoe years ago declared I was nuts to claim Saudi Arabia was involved in the 9/11 attack, yet recent years have shown i was correct. Even Fox News a republican mainstream news channel is declaring the Saudis supported the 9/11 hijackers. You just have not opened your eyes yet to the evidence, so try broadening your depth of research.