Jules and Gedeon Naudet did some excellent coverage on the day, I watched the footage and heard the impacts...Unless of course they made it all up and it was photoshop and sound effects 
The Titanic sinking conspiracy theory
- Thread starter lub0
- Start date
-
Come along to the amazing Summer Moot (21st July - 2nd August), a festival of bushcrafting and camping in a beautiful woodland PLEASE CLICK HERE for more information.
Rik. All that smoke is coming from something the planes DIDNT hit. It also comes as one huge billowing cloud of it. Indicating that its not something steadily burning.
Again, this is one of those little things that you boys like to ignore. By ignoring it, it makes it easy to buy into the official story.
How does the official story explain WTC7? It doesnt, it doesnt even try. So how can you buy the official line when it ignores the unexplained, yet clearly visible events of that day? They dont make sense, they are not explained, yet they happened.
Again, this is one of those little things that you boys like to ignore. By ignoring it, it makes it easy to buy into the official story.
How does the official story explain WTC7? It doesnt, it doesnt even try. So how can you buy the official line when it ignores the unexplained, yet clearly visible events of that day? They dont make sense, they are not explained, yet they happened.
In the same way you ignore all the other evidence and explanations and buy the conspiracy theories?
Silly comments dont help anyone mate. 
Thermite isnt a welding compound, though it can be used as one.
Nano Thermite IS used in explosives. nano thermite ISNT a welding compound. Its military grade. Know the difference?
Ridiculous theory? Not at all.
WTC7......... go on then.... whats your take on it.
Thermite isnt a welding compound, though it can be used as one.
Nano Thermite IS used in explosives. nano thermite ISNT a welding compound. Its military grade. Know the difference?
Ridiculous theory? Not at all.
WTC7......... go on then.... whats your take on it.
WTC7 WTC7 WTC7 WTC7 WTC7 WTC7 WTC7 WTC7
Whos ignoring this little problem? Everyone who buys the official version, thats who. Why are they ignoring it? Because it doesnt fit with that explanation.
I'm not ignoring ANYTHING, i'm looking deeper into it than the official story, nothing more. When you do, it doesnt add up.
Hey, i'm not doubting it mate. But that doesnt mean they were the "explosions" heard and seen by firemen. Are you suggesting none of them know what they are on about?
But that doesnt mean they were the "explosions" heard and seen by firemen. Are you suggesting none of them know what they are on about?Jules and Gedeon Naudet did some excellent coverage on the day, I watched the footage and heard the impacts...Unless of course they made it all up and it was photoshop and sound effects
Just saying what I saw and heard, and who knows what they "thought" the noises were, I have a friend who came back from Afghanistan a few months ago, she dived for cover when two trolleys banged together loudly in the supermarket, because she "thought" it was gun fire... Many things can make a noise like an explosion, doesn't mean it is a detonated charge that did it. How many of the firecrews had been witness to a similar event in the past? and could say without any doubt that the noises they heard were explosive demolition compounds being detonated.
Its not just what they heard though mate. Some saw the blasts, others were thrown down with the blasts. They were witnessed by many many people. They were reported on the news.
Too much evidence mate. It can't be ignored. ( or it can if you choose not to believe hundreds of witnesses.)
In a court of law an eyewitness is a very important piece of evidence. Eyewitness accounts send people to jail, and that just needs one eyewitness.
Yet here, hundreds of eyewitnesses accounts are being dismissed because the government says different.
Why would that be if they stand in a court of law?
Silly comments dont help anyone mate.
Thermite isnt a welding compound, though it can be used as one.
Nano Thermite IS used in explosives. nano thermite ISNT a welding compound. Its military grade. Know the difference?
Ridiculous theory? Not at all.
WTC7......... go on then.... whats your take on it.
it's used IN explosives to burn neat little holes in tanks, so the people inside get cooked. it's still not used properly because its still being researched. it is most definitley NOT a high explosive, and therefore not suitable for demolitions, where a 'cutting' effect is needed, not a 'burning' effect.
it is a ridiculous theory, along with the rest of your 'evidence'
HillBill said:
I could copy and paste the entire contents of here and pretend it was my own research. I could show you this too but I doubt it would make a difference as you've probably got answers from some other website "undebunking" it. It's just a cyclical argument which is never going to end. Even if George Bush stood up and admitted responsibility, there'd still be some other body blamed by the conspiracy theorists
The smoke was seen before the towers began to collapse. It wasn't from that. If you watch the news footage you can see for yourself.
But I have watched the footage. I watched it LIVE as it collapsed. I never saw anything but the dust from debris coming out AFTER the collapse.
Mate, those debunking sites are no more credible than the theory sites. I dont post links to such sites as i know how people see them. Same applies to the ones you have just posted.
Believing what those debunkers say, is no different to believing what the conspiracy theorists say.
So if we are idiots to listening to the consipracy stuff, then that is equally matched by debunkers.
We are either all idiots. Or none of us are.
A difference of opinion is all that seperates us, nothing more.
Yes it is a cyclical argument. Which is why i'm dropping out of this thread now as we are just going in circles and repeating ourselves.
Its been fun guys, but i think it has run its course.
Believing what those debunkers say, is no different to believing what the conspiracy theorists say.
So if we are idiots to listening to the consipracy stuff, then that is equally matched by debunkers.
We are either all idiots. Or none of us are.
A difference of opinion is all that seperates us, nothing more.
Yes it is a cyclical argument. Which is why i'm dropping out of this thread now as we are just going in circles and repeating ourselves.
Its been fun guys, but i think it has run its course.
Last edited:
Frankly both videos look like a dust cloud rising fron a collapse of some sort to me. I couldn't say from WHAT collapse though.
Nothing had collapsed at that time mate. You should know, you watched it LIVE remember? Nothing at all collapsed before the towers did. You KNOW that as well as everyone else.
Anyway, like i said above, i'm outta here. Thanks for your input throughout all of it.
Anyway, like i said above, i'm outta here. Thanks for your input throughout all of it.
Last edited:
That's just it. They DON'T stand in a court of law. Not without attourneys for both sides rigorously fighting to establish or destroy the CREDIBILITY of those witnesses first.
