A Few Words On Censorship

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

Nobody here (myself included) has a clue about how missile impact may affect a building. And my guess is Richard and Tokeless know this. It enables them to avoid an explanation of how the miraculously planned 9/11 brought about a NWO.

What? 9/11 to a NWO?

Where did you draw this random thought process from?

[davidbanner99@]

[*]

The whole subject goes beyond just architecture. You need specialisation in structural engineering, possibly geology and physics.

This is the issue.

You say, and I paraphrase, “Expertise is required, you can’t trust the opinions of a non-expert, eg you can’t trust a radio show host or a priest when it comes to collapsing towers.”

Fair enough.

"So tokeless presents an expert, an architect. And there are many experts in various fields that have legitimate questions."

Your reply is to arbitrarily move the goal post of what type of expertise. You make sh*t up, throwing in a personal opinion that geology and physics might be required.

Really? So tokeless produces experts, but those experts are not good enough based on your opinion, so you make up your own twisted logic, in effect saying, “To understand 9/11 the expert must meet qualifications A, B, C, D, and E.”

Why must they meet those qualifications David? Because you think so? It is your opinion that the expert opinion of an architect with 20 years of experience is not sufficient.

Please all pay attention to Richard's quote two pages back. He stated:

"It is the tactic of zealots to try and assign homework, that just so happens to be the gospel they preach, and then call anyone that doesn’t accept the homework assignment a heretic."

Compare to this above. What he just wrote:

"Really? So tokeless produces experts, but those experts are not good enough based on your opinion, so you make up your own twisted logic"

Well, Richard. Quietvoice presented you with similar evidence to Tokeless yet you chose to ignore it. You explained yourself this way:

"I wouldn’t call it guilty of not examining what we are offered. I consider it to be a practical or functional choice. There are only so many hours in the day. If there was some actual need or perceived benefit to what was offered, then I’ll check it out."


Why hasn't Quietvoice produced the same experts that Tokeless has? That was his argument after all.

The bottom line is I think Richard makes his views up as you go along. First, scoff at the 9/11 conspiracy and stress it's absurd to just copy and paste "homework". Then, at a given time, profess to have read what's been offered and undergo the biggest conversion in belief since Paul of Tarsus!!!

At least, Richard, people know where they stand with me, like it or not, agree or not. Your view is along the lines of "Well, the 9/11 conspiracy is absurd but how dare you not do your homework and accept there was something fishy going on after all!"

Yes, or no, Richard. Do you now accept Quietvoice was right when he said you would change your position once you read the proofs offered?

This is so funny.

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

The bottom line is I think Richard makes his views up as you go along. First, scoff at the 9/11 conspiracy and stress it's absurd to just copy and paste "homework". Then, at a given time, profess to have read what's been offered and undergo the biggest conversion in belief since Paul of Tarsus!!!

What?

David, I think you misunderstand. What conversion? My belief about what happened on 9/11 has not changed.

Also, I did not do any tokeless homework. I only pointed out that he presented an expert, an architect with 20 years experience. And I never said that I agreed with that expert.

I’m not sure where you lost track.

In fact, I think just a post or two ago I reiterated…and thought it was clear, that I think on 9/11 planes took down the towers.

[davidbanner99@]

Here's another cracker. Richard asserts:

"Really? This person has know idea the depth of your knowledge on 9/11. They have no idea what you know or don’t know. And even if it is just a paragraph that will take you 30 seconds to read, it is arrogant, manipulative, bulls#** to follow it up with the notion that failing to comply means you don’t take the discussion on the subject seriously."

So, what we see here is a sense of outrage a person should be dismissed as an ignoramus for not taking the time to read proof positive. Heaven forbid!!

And then, here:

"It is your opinion that the expert opinion of an architect with 20 years of experience is not sufficient." (as listed in the proof positive)

So, those of us who haven't read the proof offered have, after all, transgressed. Heaven help me, I failed to comply.

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

So, those of us who haven't read the proof offered have, after all, transgressed. Heaven help me, I failed to comply.

Failed to comply with what David?

[tokeless]

David, you are unable to stay on track so you twist and divert yet again. Neither myself or Richard mentioned NWO, nor has Richard said he agrees with the conspiracy, yet you try to imply such. You are quite similar to QV in that you attack opinions of others because you assume your knowledge is greater and anything that doesn't fit with you is dismissed. First you wanted experts, so I provided them. They were not acceptable so you throw in Alex Jones, which I never alluded to, to discredit my sources. I realise now I think that it is more about you expressing your opinions than taking notice of others, so I think I will starve you of the oxygen you require and say adios.

[Candid]

Here is what is going on NOW…

https://www.worldometers.info/world-pop ... y-country/

It doesn’t require ancient history or “homework”. You don’t even need to click the link as I can spell it out. The global population is going up, not down.

A link I've cited myself here, many times.

While I'm shocked to see babies that have clearly been conceived since the coronahoax began, I can't say I'm surprised. Assuming it was deliberate, their parents must have faith in their governments. More fool them.

We're already seeing lots of spontaneous post-jab miscarriages. It will be a while before the infertility ingredient becomes obvious to all.

The perpetrators are aiming for huge reductions by 2025, and about 90% by 2030.

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

Assuming it was deliberate, their parents must have faith in their governments.

Faith in government? I don’t think so. Faith in humanity? Yes. People, including parents with children, fleeing oppressive, genocidal governments is nothing new. That’s been taking place for thousands of years. It is taking place at this very moment, people fleeing conditions we struggle to fathom.

If the UK is so bad, what’s your migration plan? Given we have a republic, much of the USA is a safe zone. We’d take you in Candid. And if things were to get too bad in the USA, I have a few places in mind that are nice.

We're already seeing lots of spontaneous post-jab miscarriages. It will be a while before the infertility ingredient becomes obvious to all.

Yes. I’ve seen quite a few reports about this. There is no doubt in my mind the jab isn’t worth the risk. Still, the numbers are so small there is no statistical impact as the global population clock keeps going up, tick, tick, tick.

The perpetrators are aiming for huge reductions by 2025, and about 90% by 2030.

Those pesky perpetrators are doing a horrible job. It’s been 2 years and the population keeps rising!

So now only three years left for “huge reductions”. When will the clock start reversing Candid? When will you and I be able to check that link and see the population getting lower instead of higher?

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

Here is an idea. Let’s watch Gibraltar.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-pop ... opulation/

They have boasted 100% vaccination of citizens, plus vaccines for foreign workers. The population has stayed fairly steady over the last decade. We can watch the “death” jab in full effect, right?

Or is there some explanation why the perpetrators have decided to spare the citizens of Gibraltar? I have not seen anything that says they are special. Have you?

[davidbanner99@]

Currently doing a background check on Gage, especially how much money he's made out of his 9/11 engagements (substantial).
Turns out he's a friend of Alex Jones and the two collaborated. Funny how my mentioning Alex Jones was considered going off the subject. The two are indeed connected.

"Gage now had a new life, traveling around the world as a sort of itinerant 9/11 Truther Extraordinaire, telling audiences large and small that we need a “new investigation” into the Sept. 11 attacks.
Gage’s stock presentation goes on for hours, and features hundreds of detailed PowerPoint slides. All point toward the same conspiratorial-minded conclusion: The WTC towers were brought down by “internal demolition” — an inside job, in other words. I’ve personally sat through that same presentation three times — in New York, Toronto and Montreal (as well as the above-referenced interview I did with him for my 2011 book on conspiracy theories, Among the Truthers .)

Up to that point in his life, Gage had been a staunch “Ronald Reagan Republican” (his words) and an Iraq War supporter. But what he heard on KPFA’s airwaves blew his mind.

“[The speaker] was talking about the 118 [World Trade Center] first-responders — information that had just come out in 2005 — who said they’d heard explosions and flashes of light, beams dripping with molten metal, all amid the collapse of 80,000 tons of structural steel,” he told me. “It hit me like a two-by-four. How come I’d never heard of any of this? I was shocked. I had to pull my car to the side of the road to absorb it all. I knew I’d be late for the meeting. But I didn’t care.”
Shortly thereafter, Richard Gage quit his job and moved out of his family home. His non-Truther friends thought he was acting weird, but it didn’t bother him: Gage now had a new life, traveling around the world as a sort of itinerant 9/11 Truther Extraordinaire, telling audiences large and small that we need a “new investigation” into the Sept. 11 attacks.
Gage’s stock presentation goes on for hours, and features hundreds of detailed PowerPoint slides. All point toward the same conspiratorial-minded conclusion: The WTC towers were brought down by “internal demolition” — an inside job, in other words. I’ve personally sat through that same presentation three times — in New York, Toronto and Montreal (as well as the above-referenced interview I did with him for my 2011 book on conspiracy theories, Among the Truthers .)

The 9/11 “Truth” movement has hatched plenty of stars, of course — including hysterical radio host and internet sensation Alex Jones. But thanks to his professional training as an architect, Gage has always stood out as pre-eminent. Jones and other hotheads supplied the late-night AM Radio call-in-show rhetoric about George W. Bush and Dick Cheney engineering 9/11 as a pretext to steal the world’s oil supply on orders from the Illuminati and the Rothschilds or what not. But Gage was the guy with the pocket protector who operated the conspiracists’ back office — the researcher who ticked off the Truther talking points about the melting point of steel and the structural integrity of modern skyscrapers. "

[davidbanner99@]

"They were not acceptable so you throw in Alex Jones, which I never alluded to, to discredit my sources."

I must say that was one of my better performances because the Jones = Gage equation turns out to be bang on. The two appeared together publically hyping up 9/11 for the lecture circuit. Jones, by the way, apart from initiating the 9/11 claim, also stated the Adam Lanza high-school shootings were likewise a government conspiracy. Relative victims of the shootings sued and won.

The problem with copy and pasting random figures from social media is you forget to do the background checks.

No, I'm not trying to be clever here or belittle you, Tokeless. Not my style. I just happen to think these American conmen are laughing all the way to the bank.

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

But thanks to his professional training as an architect, Gage has always stood out as pre-eminent.

Glad to see you acknowledge his expertise.

To repeat, I never said I agree with Gage’s conclusions about 9/11. And again, I believe the towers collapsed as a result of being struck by the airplanes.

Last, I never assigned any “homework”. I simply acknowledged that Gage is an expert.

[davidbanner99@]

What's involved if you try to apply theory to this scenario is quoted below. I have done this kind of work in transmitters and modulators but have never been able to pin-down maths to practice.
As to Richard's comments that reading the notes referred to him made such an impression, all I can say is good luck with that approach.
Here is a link on the physics aspect of 9/11. I don't pretend to be either inclined or even able to pass an opinion on the physics aspect. People have, however, delved into that area, but probably in the way aircraft engineers study wreckage.

https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinfo ... erid=89496

"So let us include the energy dissipation into the problem of the progressive collapse of a high-rise building. Let us assume that the falling mass m=ξAρ crash into motionless mass dm=dξAρ beneath and let us use for dissipative energy the Equation (1), where mv=m and ms=dm . The assumption that both masses move after the impact together, i.e. with the same speed, determine the dissipation energy regardless the magnitude of the strain and properties of its material uniquely. Neglecting the differential of mass dm in comparison to m (i.e. assuming m+dm≈m formally), we come to the formula for the differential increment of dissipation energy due to the impact

dWpl(x)=12mv(x)2dmm+dm=12dmv(x)2
For the total amount of the dissipation energy from the beginning of the collapse until the mass reach the point x we receive

Wpl(x)=∫0xdWpl(ξ)=12∫0xv2(ξ)dm=12∫0xv2(ξ)Aρdξ(4)

The kinetic energy of falling mass in the point x can be then written in the form

Ek(x)=Ep(x)−Wpl(x)=12mv2(x)=12Aρxv2(x)(5)

where

Ep(x)=m(x)gx2=Aρgx22(6)

is the potential energy of the building above the point x to the point x. Inserting Ep(x) from (6) and x from (4) into (5), we obtain

Aρgx22−12∫0xv2(ξ)Aρdξ=12Aρxv2(x)
Consequently we have the resulting integral equation for the unknown function v(x)

xv2(x)+∫0xv2(ξ)dξ=gx2 for any x≥0(7)

together with the initial condition

v(0)=0(8)

and with the obvious requirement

v(x)>0 for any x>0 .(9)

Let us differentiate (7) with respect to x using the relation

ddx⎛⎝⎜∫0xv2(ξ)dξ⎞⎠⎟=ddx(F(x)−F(0))=dF(x)dx=v2(x)
where F(.) means a primitive function corresponding to v2(.). The obvious formal modification of (7) gives then the differential equation of collapse of a high-rise building, assuming that the columns do not resist the fall and all falling mass hits to the mass beneath, in the form, valid any for any x > 0,

dv(x)dx=gx−v2(x)v(x)x.(10)

Clearly this differential equation can be rewritten as

v(x)dv(x)dxx=gx−v(x)2
v(x)(dv(x)dxx+v(x))=gx(11)

multiplying (11) by x also as

xv(x)(dv(x)dxx+v(x))=gx2
thus after integration, using some real constan C,

12(xv(x))2=gx33+C2 ,

which yields

xv(x)=±23gx3+C−−−−−−−−√ .

Then the solution of (9) can be expressed with respect to (8) in the explicit form

v(x)=23gx3+C√x
Moreover (7) forces C = 0, which leads to the simple formula

v(x)=23gx−−−−√(12)

for the evaluation of the required velocity v(x). "

It's not just architecture.

[Richard@DecisionSkills]

As to Richard's comments that reading the notes referred to him made such an impression, all I can say is good luck with that approach.

You mean the approach that has lead me to believe the towers collapsed due to airliners smashing into them? That approach?

[davidbanner99@]

I think I've had my say and should leave it at that point. That is, debate something fresh. All I tried to.get across is there are people making a lot of money out of conspiracy. I'm afraid the more I delved into it, the more cynical I got. There's also a point you can get so cynical, it's wise to step back a bit. At the moment some of it gets like a red rag to a bull.
Personally (and this is just me), my anti vax position is my own show. I've no plan to rely on groups and cult leaders to shape my thoughts. Ultimately people have a right to see things differently than I do.