• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

9/11 Experiments: The Great Thermate Debate

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

pixelsmith said:
1. I freely admit global warming is real. Just like global cooling and ice ages... all very real.
2. I freely admit I may be wrong about 9/11. I have stated many times over the years that I do not expect nor want anyone to believe a word I say. I HOPE you question what I say and do your own research.
3. I freely admit I have been wrong about many things in life.
4. I freely admit when I am wrong and have done so in these forums more than once.
5. I am very proud to be a conspiracy theorist because in the long run we are usually right.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's the first time I've seen you admit the possibility you might be wrong, kudos. However, some of this is total crap, you admit whatever you have to admit about global warming to continue an argument without being completely discredited, kind of like how you admitted that AGW was real in the global warming thread, there your issue was with CAGW after you admitted AGW was a fact, and yet you continue to rail about the global warming "hoax" and how it hasn't warmed for the last blah blah years and yet that position has been completely and utterly discredited and refuted by anyone who knows anything about climate science. See, I do question everything you say and I do my own research and when I do that on things like global warming, the research and verifiable evidence shows that you couldn't be more wrong about that particular issue. You have admitted to being wrong about certain things, I've just never seen you admit the possibility that you might be wrong about these key issues, like I said, kudos for at least recognizing the possibility.

As for number 5, are you serious? How about the North American Union, Amero, FEMA camps, military run gun grabs, UN global governance, World Wars, the US being put under martial law, how many "false flag" attacks were just around the corner that never materialized? I mean the list goes on and on, you conspiracy theorists are almost always wrong, of course you'll probably say that some or all of that is still on the way, like it has been for the last 30 years, but give me a break already...
 
Last edited:
You have not been here very long so you wouldn't have heard me admit when I was wrong. People seem to want to lump GW, AGW and CAGW together and sometimes it is easier for me to go with it. I know GW and AGW are both real. CAGW is not and most likely will never be a concern. That stuff is for the global warming thread.
#5.. NAU and a new form of currency will probably happen once the economy is destroyed. FEMA camps are obviously real as they had FEMA camps AND gun grabbing during Katrina. UN global governance (NWO) is real and admitted by lots of people including presidents, vice presidents and other officials. Just google NWO speeches. While you are at it google how many conspiracy theories have become actual conspiracy facts.
 
pixelsmith said:
You have not been here very long so you wouldn't have heard me admit when I was wrong. People seem to want to lump GW, AGW and CAGW together and sometimes it is easier for me to go with it. I know GW and AGW are both real. CAGW is not and most likely will never be a concern. That stuff is for the global warming thread.
#5.. NAU and a new form of currency will probably happen once the economy is destroyed. FEMA camps are obviously real as they had FEMA camps AND gun grabbing during Katrina. UN global governance (NWO) is real and admitted by lots of people including presidents, vice presidents and other officials. Just google NWO speeches. While you are at it google how many conspiracy theories have become actual conspiracy facts.
Click to expand...

Right, it's all just down the pipe, for the last 30 years its been "coming." Your examples are total crap, first of all the new world order they speak of and the new world order you imagine is not the same thing and it's one thing to theorize and fantasize about something and quite another to actually implement it, the UN is one of the most toothless organizations on the planet, the fact that conspiracy theorists get all riled up about it makes me laugh my balls off. You need to differentiate between FEMA camps for emergencies and the conspiracy idea of long term detention FEMA camps for the masses which are the hallmark of many ridiculous conspiracy theories. The NAU and the Amero were never anything but theoretical. In real life, the border between us and Mexico and Canada is now more controlled than it ever has been in the past and seems that it's going to be even more tightly controlled if certain groups have their way, and that's a fact. The devil is in the details, as they say, and that's exactly where most of these conspiracy theories fall flat on their face.
 
Last edited:
So tell me how many conspiracy theories you have found that have turned out to be true later on? You DID research it before commenting didn't you?
 
pixelsmith said:
So tell me how many conspiracy theories you have found that have turned out to be true later on? You DID research it before commenting didn't you?
Click to expand...

No, I'm not interested in how many conspiracy theories became true, because it doesn't matter. There could be 1 million conspiracy theories that became true, it doesn't mean that these particular conspiracy theories that I've seen you spout off about are going to become true. You can't generalize about the subject like that and expect it to sound credible, it doesn't. I just listed a whole bunch of popular conspiracy theories that didn't become true and are probably never going to become true, and I'd be willing to bet that the number of conspiracy theories that disappeared like a fart in the wind outnumber the ones that may have become true by a HUGE margin. Nobody is saying that conspiracies don't exist, just that many of the "theories" commonly touted by conspiracy theorists are horseshit with little to no evidence to support them.
 
Muadib said:
No, I'm not interested in how many conspiracy theories became true, because it doesn't matter. There could be 1 million conspiracy theories that became true, it doesn't mean that these particular conspiracy theories that I've seen you spout off about are going to become true. You can't generalize about the subject like that and expect it to sound credible, it doesn't. I just listed a whole bunch of popular conspiracy theories that didn't become true and are probably never going to become true, and I'd be willing to bet that the number of conspiracy theories that disappeared like a fart in the wind outnumber the ones that may have become true by a HUGE margin.
Click to expand...
I figured you would not be interested because you might find out you are wrong and have to admit it. Check out the link at infowars... don't bother killing the messenger.. just tell me which theories that came true are wrong and we can discuss it.
» 33 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out To Be True, What Every Person Should Know… Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
 
pixelsmith said:
I figured you would not be interested because you might find out you are wrong and have to admit it. Check out the link at infowars... don't bother killing the messenger.. just tell me which theories that came true are wrong and we can discuss it.
» 33 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out To Be True, What Every Person Should Know… Alex Jones' Infowars: There's a war on for your mind!
Click to expand...

What am I wrong about? I already admit that there are conspiracies, of course there are, but that doesn't make it any more or less likely that 9/11 was an inside job or that global warming is some giant hoax. Your point is pointless, in other words. Your evidence for the specific conspiracies we've been discussing is weak so you've fallen back to generalizations, just like you always do. It's not at all persuasive. On top of that, I would castrate myself with a rusty kitchen knife before I get my information from any site that has anything to do with Alex Jones' (who also happens to be a fundamentalist....weird...) crazy ass. The guy has said, word for word, that there's a conspiracy to put chemicals in kids juice boxes and turn them gay and that's the credible information you want to point me towards? No thank you.

Edit:

Just so people know that I'm not making that last part about Alex Jones up, here's the video.

 
Last edited:
pixelsmith said:
Before I reply do you mind if I call you a "9/11 Liar" since I am a 9/11 Truther?
Click to expand...
Only if you admit to believing and promoting the indiscriminate mass murder of its citizens as a guiltless state sanctioned event in the USA.

And technically, I would more accurately describe myself as open to possibilities. The problem is that none of your rhetoric or possibilities make any sense (i.e. blowing up the Pentagon accountants to hide more crimes of the state - seriously?) They just simply say out loud, "Oh, btw, we lost some trillions, uh...sorry about that."
 
I agree that there are theories about 9/11 that run from the plausible to the ridiculous (such as holographic planes etc) and I see myself as being at the opposite end of the scale from the type of person who thinks the planes were holograms.

For those of you who accept the official version, I am no pilot, architect or structural engineer. I am an engineer but nothing to do with building construction or aircraft construction. I wonder if the fact that hundreds of highly qualified engineers and architects have major problems with the collapse of 3 steel-framed buildings in one day, when previously none had ever failed in such a manner?

Common sense tells you the towers' steel frame provided no resistance to debris falling from above, it's like it effectively disappeared. Even if we accept that the floors around and above impact were buggered and on fire, none of that explains how the steel frame didn't do it's job and seemed not to even be present? The collapse should have been messy, certainly not symmetric and the frame should have been getting totally in the way of the top of the building that was falling. Not only did it just seem to crumble to nothing, it seemed to do it instantaneously!

Even if WT7 had been weakened by the relatively small fires it had, it should not have collapsed straight down at near free-fall? It was so tidy and perfect, it could only have been a controlled demolition.

But it's the Pentagon that bothers me most. If you look at photos of the 'impact' before the building collapsed, it just does not look like such a plane hit. No evidence of wings or engines hitting etc. You can look at hundreds of plane crashes and there is always large bits of debris, but in this case it was almost non-existant?
 
By the way, does anyone participating in this thread happen to believe the official story over the assassination of JFK - as in, one gunman, namely Lee Harvey Oswald?

I ask because I assume most people do not and I am using it to illustrate that there can be 'accepted facts' that few actually accept.
 
Goggs Mackay said:
Common sense tells you the towers' steel frame provided no resistance to debris falling from above, it's like it effectively disappeared. Even if we accept that the floors around and above impact were buggered and on fire, none of that explains how the steel frame didn't do it's job and seemed not to even be present? The collapse should have been messy, certainly not symmetric and the frame should have been getting totally in the way of the top of the building that was falling. Not only did it just seem to crumble to nothing, it seemed to do it instantaneously!

Even if WT7 had been weakened by the relatively small fires it had, it should not have collapsed straight down at near free-fall? It was so tidy and perfect, it could only have been a controlled demolition.
Click to expand...

Goggs, do not give in so easily to the dark side. What you call a controlled demolition is what structural engineers call the only possible way the building could collapse. How's that for another perspective? These are truly extraordinary events with so many extreme variables at play that it makes it very ripe for conspiracy thinking (don't lock on that viewpoint as the only common sense possibility). This type of rare event makes it easy for anyone to say, "I don't believe it because I don't think that's the effect a plane would have if it crashed into a building." How often do jets crash into buildings? Where are the comparisons?

Here's the answer to why it collapsed the way it did. As an engineer you'll have no problem following the discussion under "The Collapse", but the rest is also worth reading.

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation
 
Last edited:
Ok: contoled demoliton of the wtc 1 2 and 7 could be acomplished onlt by undermineing the cental core of tower 1 and 2 there are only 1 or 2 company's world wide that coild pull it off. There are NO witnessess to the intense work that would be required.siple rewireing would not suffice. Power downs would affect all thrre buildings.
 
Burnt State said:
This type of rare event makes it easy for anyone to say, "I don't believe it because I don't think that's the effect a plane would have if it crashed into a building." How often do jets crash into buildings? Where are the comparisons?
Click to expand...

This is one of the points that I've tried to make this entire thread, the event wasn't just rare, it was completely and utterly without precedent. You can't compare a passenger jet flying at over 400mph into a reinforced concrete building with a passenger jet that crash lands in a field and you can't compare it with the two towers, because steel and glass is not reinforced concrete, of course these two different surfaces are going to react differently, which is why we don't see the outline of the plane in the Pentagon like we do in the one tower. There is no comparison available, because it has never happened before. Therefore, no matter how much people want to say "well, it should've done this" or "it should've looked like this" the reality is that you have nothing to compare it to except the images you can conjure up in your own mind.

I find it hilarious that when you boil this whole thing down some people will go to any ridiculously stupid length (including conjuring up either one missile and a plane that can turn invisible on command or two planes, one of which also apparently vanished into thin air right after it appeared in front of multiple witnesses and knocked down a bunch of light poles) in order to reconcile the witness statements with their silly conspiracy theory because..... wait for it.... they think it looked weird.
 
Last edited:
Having said all of that I firmly beleve that the USA used the events of 9/11 to justfy two wars..the 9/11 report is a load of BS designed to justify war to the masses. I would not be the 1st time or the last...
 
Lastly I challange pixel or anyone else to post the testomony of ONE witness of unusual work being prefomed on the cetral core of WTC 1 and 2. I will get to dismantling the article pixal posted soon as soon as all facts are in hand.
 
Last edited:
Muadib said:
Click to expand...

I AM OFFICIALY OUTRAGED ABOUT JUICE BOXES. AND GAYS.

Must have been a slow news week. I like Alex, I think he means well, but he's become too immersed in it all. I can see how it could happen. He's done some real good work, but he's also acted like a total loon and been wrong on some things too. Even if Alex is wrong half the time, that's still a higher batting average than MSM IMO :)
 
Goggs Mackay said:
I agree that there are theories about 9/11 that run from the plausible to the ridiculous (such as holographic planes etc) and I see myself as being at the opposite end of the scale from the type of person who thinks the planes were holograms.

For those of you who accept the official version, I am no pilot, architect or structural engineer. I am an engineer but nothing to do with building construction or aircraft construction. I wonder if the fact that hundreds of highly qualified engineers and architects have major problems with the collapse of 3 steel-framed buildings in one day, when previously none had ever failed in such a manner?

Common sense tells you the towers' steel frame provided no resistance to debris falling from above, it's like it effectively disappeared. Even if we accept that the floors around and above impact were buggered and on fire, none of that explains how the steel frame didn't do it's job and seemed not to even be present? The collapse should have been messy, certainly not symmetric and the frame should have been getting totally in the way of the top of the building that was falling. Not only did it just seem to crumble to nothing, it seemed to do it instantaneously!

Even if WT7 had been weakened by the relatively small fires it had, it should not have collapsed straight down at near free-fall? It was so tidy and perfect, it could only have been a controlled demolition.

But it's the Pentagon that bothers me most. If you look at photos of the 'impact' before the building collapsed, it just does not look like such a plane hit. No evidence of wings or engines hitting etc. You can look at hundreds of plane crashes and there is always large bits of debris, but in this case it was almost non-existant?
Click to expand...
It was a magical jam packed day of suspended physics. And a few people actually do believe the official story!
 
Back
Top