|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Do You Believe Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings? | |||
| Our Government with ABC, CBS and NBC would never lie about this so I believe everything. |
   
|
1 | 25.00% |
| Our Government with ABC, CBS and ABC faked the whole thing. |
  
|
2 | 50.00% |
| I want the Falcons to win the Superbowl. |
  
|
1 | 25.00% |
| Voters: 4. You may not vote on this poll | |||
Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
this is a discussion within the Everything Else Community Forum; Originally Posted by foreverfan Explain how building 7 (STEEL) fell at the same speed as someone jumping out the window? WTC 1 & 2 both fell as the same speed. IMPOSSIBLE. That my friend is impossible to explain unless you ...
4Likes |
|
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-04-2017, 07:30 PM
|
#11 |
|
1000 Posts +
|
Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
Originally Posted by foreverfan
The problem with saying that you believe what is in front of your eyes is that if you don't know enough about what you are seeing, or you are seeing an incomplete representation, your eyes won't do you any good. Let's not forget you posted a video that started this very thread, that was quickly proven false. I'm not trying to take a shot at you, I'm merely pointing out the problem with taking things at face value, because someone wants you to believe a certain narrative.
With all due respect to your dad, he might believe it was impossible, but unless he has built a skyscraper, built it the exact way WTC7 was designed, then set that building on fire and let it burn for 7 or 8 hours, then he couldn't possibly know or understand what happened. That's why people who DID know how it was designed, and who are trained to understand the dynamics of what those fires could do were sent to investigate. And they gave a very clear answer. That video you showed is the same one all of these self proclaimed "truthers" on the internet always show. It is a blatantly dishonest attempt to deceive people into believing their narrative. That video begins at the final collapse, and leaves out the previous EIGHT SECONDS of footage that prove exactly what the NIST concluded. The video you showed was just several different angles of the exact same time span, that ALL left out the previous 8 seconds. It leaves out the collapse of the penthouse that sticks out above the roof of WTC 7 on the left. Here's the video of the entire collapse. Now you see what I mean by "incomplete representation". I'm guessing you probably declined to read the link I left you previously, that described the thermal expansion due to the hours of uncontrolled fires, but I'll give you a quicker rundown of events. The sprinklers did not work because they were connected to the city's water supply that was damaged from the collapses of the twin towers. The expansion from the hours of intense heat caused steel girders, beginning on the lower floors, to disconnect from their supporting columns. The area where the initial failures occurred took place directly below the penthouse I mentioned before, and that is why you clearly see it collapse first. This created a cascade of floor failures that basically left just an outer shell of a building. It's at that point that others decide to begin their video where the rest of the building comes down with little resistance. It took 14 seconds, roughly, for that building to fall. A far cry from the misinformation others have given. As a bonus, here's a video from a fellow who takes the time to animate these events and show just how the events described, occurred, and offers some very interesting analysis to rebut some of the theories. |
|
If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.
|
|
|
|
|
02-06-2017, 11:53 AM
|
#12 |
|
12,000 BS Posts
|
Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
Thank you burningmedal for posting all of that information. There is a ton of other information that pertains to that day that could be wrong on both sides.
For the record... This thread was about the Moon Landing and I did not say it was a hoax. Everything posted at the beginning of this thread was copied and pasted from Youtube. Hey... Our season is over so I just wanted to make fun of something. Thanks for the 911 stuff. That was good. |
|
|
|
|
02-06-2017, 05:16 PM
|
#13 |
|
1000 Posts +
|
Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
Originally Posted by foreverfan
Thank you for taking the time to consider the information, and not shouting at me, as others do on this subject.
I wasn't sure whether or not you believed the moon Landing was faked, but I figured you were leaning that way, when I read "very interesting". I thought you wrote that. Also, it seems that very often when I debate 9/11 theories with people, they believe the moon landings were faked, as well. At any rate, I don't doubt that there are government cover-ups. As a matter of fact, we know there have been some. But specifically as it pertains to 9/11, there are a lot of videos claiming this or that, and many of them deliberately leave things out. That bothers me, given the nature of what happened that day, that people (not you) would edit videos to try to stir controversy. I'm all for the truth, but some of these people have preconceived agendas when they selectively use only information that supports their theory. |
|
If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
02-08-2017, 10:54 AM
|
#14 |
|
12,000 BS Posts
|
Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
Originally Posted by burningmetal
And the truth of the matter for 911 is that we will never know the truth. The "Truthers" bring out many great questions and things that on the surface, doesn't make sense.
Dad and I biggest problem is that those buildings should have never fallen straight down much less that fast. This should be impossible because we are talking about steel and not cards. It should have shown massive resistance. Remember... unlike building 9 the bottom was still in tack. Both towers should have at least slow down when falling.... but instead you have free fall speed and massive clouds of concrete dust? Plus for 8+ weeks after you have fire of steel soundarya that burned at the surface? Wow... Check out this video... In any case, we won't solve it. Just considering what really happened. |
|
|
|
|
02-08-2017, 10:59 AM
|
#15 |
|
12,000 BS Posts
|
Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
Originally Posted by burningmetal
And the truth of the matter for 911 is that we will never know the truth. The "Truthers" bring out many great questions and things that on the surface, doesn't make sense.
Dad and I biggest problem is that those buildings should have never fallen straight down much less that fast. This should be impossible because we are talking about steel and not cards. It should have shown massive resistance. Remember... unlike building 9 the bottom was still in tack. Both towers should have at least slow down when falling.... but instead you have free fall speed and massive clouds of concrete dust? Plus for 8+ weeks after... you have a fire of steel soundarya that burned on the surface. According to Google steel melts at around 2500-2750°F. What made that temperature? When does kerosene (plane fuel) and falling medal do that? Wow... I can't explain either. Check out this video... In any case, we won't solve it. Just considering what really happened. |
|
Last edited by foreverfan; 02-08-2017 at 11:14 AM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
03-21-2017, 01:58 PM
|
#16 |
|
Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New Haven Ct
Posts: 23,985
|
Re: Stanley Kubrick Confesses To Faking The Moon Landings
Was that the first time.
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
