It is currently Mon Sep 22, 2014 10:42 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 110 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Conspiracy?
Yea 43%  43%  [ 19 ]
Nay 41%  41%  [ 18 ]
Who Cares? 16%  16%  [ 7 ]
Total votes : 44
Author Message
 Post subject: September 11... Conspiracy?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:09 am 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 7:18 pm
Posts: 2928
Location: SC
EDIT: Official Source of Info.! - this explains away a lot of the conspiracy theories.
-------

This is just for fun :lol:

A journalist I like recently wrote an article I found surprising. Two articles actually: 1, 2.

If you don't feel like reading them through, his points are as follows:

1. We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much less steel columned buildings, to "pancake" at free fall speed. Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official explanation of the collapse of the WTC buildings is false.

2. We also know for a fact that the Air Force somehow inexplicably failed to intercept the alleged hijacked airliners despite the fact that the Air Force can launch jet fighters to 29,000 feet in 2.5 minutes.

3. We also know that the two co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission have just written a book that reveals that the US military lied to the Commission about its failure to intercept the hijacked airliners.

Every air control and military procedure fails, and hijacked airliners are not intercepted by jet fighters.

4. The alleged hijackers’ names apparently are not on the passenger lists, and some of the alleged hijackers have been found alive and well in Saudi Arabia.

5. Dr. Thomas R. Olmstead used the Freedom of Information Act to get a copy of the autopsy list of American Airlines flight 77, and he reports that there are no Arabic names on the list.

6. A large 757 hits the Pentagon but leaves a small hole, and there is no sign of wings, engines, tail or fuselage.

I think those are all of his points - quoted from the 2 articles.

His conclusion is simply that this is too improbable to believe.


Last edited by Trip on Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:18 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:14 am 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 7:18 pm
Posts: 2928
Location: SC
Was it the first wave of an alien invasion, chick-fil-a cows on a covert operation against a beef lover convention, or a cover up of Bush after a wild night of drinking?

This isn't something I've cared to look into, but all theories welcome!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: September 11... Conspiracy?
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 2465
Location: London
Trip wrote:
1. We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much less steel columned buildings, to "pancake" at free fall speed.


What a fabulous start to the thread.

Unless TV stations across the world were showing the fall in slow motion, the towers weren't falling at 9.81 m/s^2.

Are you going to quote the claim that steel can't melt at the temperatures present inside the buildings, as well?

(Popular Mechanics ran a nice article debunking some of the myths in May 2005.)

_________________
Thinkpad X200 – aging fan, T60p – Core Duo whine :(
Nothing endures but change


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 6:55 am
Posts: 5085
Location: UK
Quote:
The alleged hijackers’ names apparently are not on the passenger lists


Surely terrorists wouldn't use fake names, would they? :shock: :roll:


Next we will be told the Apollo moon landings never happened.

I wouldn't be surprised if a mod locked this thread.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: False Flag Psychological Warfare
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:08 am
Posts: 35
Sadly when you dig really deep into this subject, without any bias or pre conceived ideas, you’d need to be pretty ignorant to believe the official story. It’s mostly the size of the conspiracy that throws people, which is why in many awful respects, it was the perfect crime. Building 7 was the clincher for me, then every other ridiculous aspect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/911_Conspiracy :x


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:53 am 
Offline
Patron of SPCR

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:23 am
Posts: 444
Location: Pacific Northwest
Unfortunately both sides of the argument are full of holes. I chalk it up to one of those things we'll never know for sure.

I'd rather the government focus on what makes the US a target.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:06 am 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 11:24 am
Posts: 1735
Location: 'Sunny' Cornwall U.K.
ultrachrome wrote:
I'd rather the government focus on what makes the US a target.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

ROFLMFAO!!!.....



Oh The Irony :lol: :lol: :lol: .....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:39 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 1630
Location: Portugal
peteamer wrote:
ultrachrome wrote:
I'd rather the government focus on what makes the US a target.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

ROFLMFAO!!!.....



Oh The Irony :lol: :lol: :lol: .....


Indeed... I LOL'ed.
But consider this... if they knew the attacks were going to happen why didn't they do something about it? *cough*maybe they needed an excuse to wage war on "terror"*cough*

_________________
Fractal Define R4 | Corsair AX750 | MSI Z97 Gaming 5 | Intel Core i7 4770K w/TRUE 120 Rev. C | 16GB G.Skill Sniper DDR3-1866 | Sapphire HD 7970 3GB OC w/Arctic Accelero Xtreme IV 280(X) | Crucial m4 128GB + Crucial MX100 512GB + WD Caviar Blue 1TB + WD Caviar Red 4TB | JVC HA-RX900 | Dell U2312HM + BenQ G2400WD | SteelSeries 7G | Logitech G400s | SteelSeries QcK+


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:21 am 
Offline
Patron of SPCR

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:23 am
Posts: 444
Location: Pacific Northwest
I fail to see any humor in it. Maybe you can enlighten me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:40 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 1630
Location: Portugal
ultrachrome wrote:
I fail to see any humor in it. Maybe you can enlighten me.


Reread what you said and you will find the irony.

_________________
Fractal Define R4 | Corsair AX750 | MSI Z97 Gaming 5 | Intel Core i7 4770K w/TRUE 120 Rev. C | 16GB G.Skill Sniper DDR3-1866 | Sapphire HD 7970 3GB OC w/Arctic Accelero Xtreme IV 280(X) | Crucial m4 128GB + Crucial MX100 512GB + WD Caviar Blue 1TB + WD Caviar Red 4TB | JVC HA-RX900 | Dell U2312HM + BenQ G2400WD | SteelSeries 7G | Logitech G400s | SteelSeries QcK+


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:44 am 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 11:24 am
Posts: 1735
Location: 'Sunny' Cornwall U.K.
ultrachrome wrote:
I fail to see any humor in it. Maybe you can enlighten me.

Asking The Government to look into what makes the U.S.A./America a target :roll: .....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:02 am 
Offline
Patron of SPCR

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:23 am
Posts: 444
Location: Pacific Northwest
Ironic or not, I don't find it funny. The government and the policies they create are not the same thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 6:55 am
Posts: 5085
Location: UK
Quote:
Ironic or not, I don't find it funny.


Bzzzt....does not compute...sense of humour failure.....bzzzt.


Quote:
The government and the policies they create are not the same thing


No, that's true, but they are responsible for them, in the same way that a parent is responsible for its children. It should be very clear that US foreign policy is perceived as being both imperialist and too biased towards Israel all across the Middle East; whether this is an accurate perception is a matter for debate. Also many find the Bush administration's cultivation of the fundamentalist Christian right (incl. Creationists and so-called "Intelligent Design" etc) very worrying.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:06 pm
Posts: 224
Location: Switzerland
I wouldn't be sure of either side, but there's definately something fishy going on, so I'll lean towards the "yes" side...

We might find out the real truth in 50 years from now, IIRC that's how long the US gov keeps stuff secret. When was JFK killed again? His assasination plans must be released relatively soon. Funnily enough he was probably killed in order to make a war, same reason the WTC came down if it was the government that did it.

I guess it all makes sense: who has guns and bombs (enough to kill a president and blow up a couple of buildings)? The arms industry. Who profits from a war? The arms industry.

THEY ARE EVERYWHERE :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
My custom wood case.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:26 am 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2003 11:24 am
Posts: 1735
Location: 'Sunny' Cornwall U.K.
ultrachrome wrote:
The government and the policies they create are not the same thing.

They are... if you involve the word dim-witted in either/each sentence... :wink: .....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Oh dear!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:46 pm
Posts: 58
Location: Seattle, Washington
I've read a whole lot about this because my first instinct was that something was awry. I found a lot of things that point to government conspiracy, and then saw a lot of couterpoints that make many of those things seem like utter hogwash. (no plane at the pentagon, flight 93 diverted to Cleveland, missiles from planes, control pods, etc.)

I try to stay sane on this one, as there is a lot of wackiness on both sides. But, there's so much pointing to at least a little government involvement that it's hard to deny. I'm leaning toward yes. But I'll wait for that completely irrefutable bit of evidence or testimony before I go preaching. I'm curious and skeptical, and I wish more people were.

Things weird about official story:
passport that survives crash into WTC (?) failure of NORAD jets to intercept (??) hiackers that are still alive (?!?) high volume of trading the day before (!) Oh, the list goes on and on.

I don't want to propose an answer to these questions, but I wish the gov. would answer them. Why the secrecy?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:59 pm 
Offline
Patron of SPCR

Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 1:59 pm
Posts: 117
Location: Manchester, UK
Trip, I really enjoyed the links in your first post (and the possible explanations in your second post were even better). It seems clear to me that aliens must be involved somewhere - probably those green saliva-dripping ones on the Simpsons. The reason they're on the Simpsons is to fool us into thinking that they're fictional.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:40 pm
Posts: 130
Quote:
1. We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much less steel columned buildings, to "pancake" at free fall speed. Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official explanation of the collapse of the WTC buildings is false.


Actually, it's quite possible. What do you expect, for a building not to fall according to physics? Sorry bud, it ain't happening. It's going down.

Quote:
2. We also know for a fact that the Air Force somehow inexplicably failed to intercept the alleged hijacked airliners despite the fact that the Air Force can launch jet fighters to 29,000 feet in 2.5 minutes.


It can, yes. given enough time. And that's after all the pre-flight checks, logbooks, all the paperwork. Counting all that, you're looking at closer to at least half an hour.

Quote:
3. We also know that the two co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission have just written a book that reveals that the US military lied to the Commission about its failure to intercept the hijacked airliners.


Don't believe everything that you hear.

Quote:
Every air control and military procedure fails, and hijacked airliners are not intercepted by jet fighters.

Again, see point #2. Given time, it's possible. Besides, I doubt something like this happens in every highjacking, crashing planes into buildings. Most of the time, they land, hold hostages, and then the bargaining begins.

Quote:
4. The alleged hijackers’ names apparently are not on the passenger lists, and some of the alleged hijackers have been found alive and well in Saudi Arabia.


Nevermind that they probubly used fake names, but you do know that there's more than one person with each of those names in the world, right?

Quote:
5. Dr. Thomas R. Olmstead used the Freedom of Information Act to get a copy of the autopsy list of American Airlines flight 77, and he reports that there are no Arabic names on the list.


Again, fake names. That, and a lot of people change their names to more american names when moving to the states.

Quote:
6. A large 757 hits the Pentagon but leaves a small hole, and there is no sign of wings, engines, tail or fuselage.

:rolleyes:

So, a 757, which is really 13 feet in diameter not counting the tail, wings, engines, landing gear, makes a 13 foot hole, and the plane shreads. what's the big deal?
Image


Other LIES from other sites omit the fact that:
-steel melts at 1525 degrees, but since the plane fuel only burns at 825 degrees, it didnt melt it, even though steel loses over half it's strength at 650 degrees
-There's no debris. O RLY?
Image
Image
-That it was a military plane because people couldn't see anything in the plane, nevermind that the plane was flying very far away
Image


I'm pretty busy right now, I'll have more later, but seriously, you believe that crap?

I love how people overlook things.

_________________
My rig
AMD Opteron 146 @ 2.6 ghz
2x512 Kingston HyperX 2.5-4-4-10 @ 260
80gb Western Digital
160gb Seagate Barracuda .9
200gb Maxtor diamondmax 10
BFG 6600gt OC @ 650/1600


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2002 11:56 pm
Posts: 757
Location: EARTH.
cAPSLOCK wrote:
We might find out the real truth in 50 years from now, IIRC that's how long the US gov keeps stuff secret.


Or maybe not. People still talk about conspiracy theories involving Pearl Harbor.

Personally, I doubt the conspiracy theories around 9/11; most of them seem factually suspect.

_________________
Fun: GOLDFISHY
Work: Video Surveillance


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:46 pm
Posts: 58
Location: Seattle, Washington
Ryan, you've picked on the easy questions. I think the government's theories are untrue, and I don't subscribe to the no-plane-at-the-pentagon theory either.

I really think that "don't believe everything that you hear" should apply doubly when it comes to the government.

Plus, if you have to answer "it's possible" as many times as you did to the listed questions, bear in mind that the possibility drops each time you do. It's possible to get heads in a coin flip, but not nearly as easy to do it 10-20 times in a row. When confronted with the huge list of improbabilities that occurred on 9-11, you can't just attack each one on its own with "it's possible."

No matter what you believe, there was some weird stuff going on all at once, and not many of the dots connect yet. With the lack of information released by the government, to be certain of any theory is just wishful thinking. This includes the official version of events as well. Until there's more evidence, anyone who thinks they know an answer is a 'conspiracy theorist.' This applies to you too Ryan.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:40 pm
Posts: 130
Yes, I understand. The conspiracies aren't entirely true, or entirely false. The government's official statement, same. Not entirely true, but not entirely false.

Believe what you want. I just don't think zooming in on a few blurry pictures, picking pictures to prove a point, even if they're not entirely right. Like how there are pictures where there aren't debris outside the pentagon, even though another angle clearly shows it. Or a trick of light, which is suddenly intrepreted as a missile firing into the towers before impact. I just don't buy it.

On the other hand, I also don't believe 100% what the government says. Specificly, tower #7.

Until there's conclusive evidence, I'm going to side with the official response.

_________________
My rig
AMD Opteron 146 @ 2.6 ghz
2x512 Kingston HyperX 2.5-4-4-10 @ 260
80gb Western Digital
160gb Seagate Barracuda .9
200gb Maxtor diamondmax 10
BFG 6600gt OC @ 650/1600


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:57 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 1630
Location: Portugal
I take it you have never seen this then... (?)
http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm

Take it as you will.
P.S.: Oh and wings (not to mention fuselage and tail) don't mysteriously disappear you know... they just desintegrated, that's it :lol:

_________________
Fractal Define R4 | Corsair AX750 | MSI Z97 Gaming 5 | Intel Core i7 4770K w/TRUE 120 Rev. C | 16GB G.Skill Sniper DDR3-1866 | Sapphire HD 7970 3GB OC w/Arctic Accelero Xtreme IV 280(X) | Crucial m4 128GB + Crucial MX100 512GB + WD Caviar Blue 1TB + WD Caviar Red 4TB | JVC HA-RX900 | Dell U2312HM + BenQ G2400WD | SteelSeries 7G | Logitech G400s | SteelSeries QcK+


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:08 am
Posts: 35
But why is Tower 7 so important?

Image
We can debate for hours whether the extrusion under the 767 is standard equipment on a 767, an illusion, or a missile.

We can debate for hours whether the hole at the Pentagon was supportive of a 757 impact, or not.

Image
And why the most surveyed and secure zone on earth, was infiltrated. While one very low quality video is all we are allowed to see. Admittedly, it is hard to prove the no 757 myth, but the government seems happy to keep it alive, maybe they can't debunk it.

We can also debate whether the debris at the pentagon belongs to a 757, some say definitely no, others definitively yes. The damage says no, the debris say it’s possible, although the lack of engines and wing sections is odd to say the least, not to mention the lack of damage they caused. Are we being hoaxed? We need to see engines, not APU fan blades, engines don't vanish, and they make short work of anything in their way. Except apparently at the Pentagon.

Image
We can debate whether a commercial airliner can hit the ground and vaporize….aka Shanksville

Or whether a cell phone will work at 30000 ft “Hello, mum, this is Mark Bingham speaking………the plane has been hijacked………you believe me don’t you?â€


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:52 am 
Offline
Patron of SPCR

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:31 pm
Posts: 1069
Location: Munich, Bavaria, Europe
I'd just like to know why the Pentagon, which I would think belongs to the places with the most security cameras in the world (or at least it should), can only produce one video going at about 1fps, considering my cellphone cam can probably take a better video than that. so you're telling me theres exactly 1 camera pointed at the area it takes for an alleged plane to strike a building?

_________________
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Benjamin Franklin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:56 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 1:59 am
Posts: 1630
Location: Portugal
Did you see the movie I posted? All [surveilance] camera's footage was confiscated. Well, almost everything.

_________________
Fractal Define R4 | Corsair AX750 | MSI Z97 Gaming 5 | Intel Core i7 4770K w/TRUE 120 Rev. C | 16GB G.Skill Sniper DDR3-1866 | Sapphire HD 7970 3GB OC w/Arctic Accelero Xtreme IV 280(X) | Crucial m4 128GB + Crucial MX100 512GB + WD Caviar Blue 1TB + WD Caviar Red 4TB | JVC HA-RX900 | Dell U2312HM + BenQ G2400WD | SteelSeries 7G | Logitech G400s | SteelSeries QcK+


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 10:18 am
Posts: 96
Unless security tapes were running at high speed, you're not going to see much on a tight angle shot when the plane flies by at 500mph. Recording tapes rarely record at even normal speed to save tape-guards are watching normal speed cameras anyway. The outer wall of the pentagon is reinforced concrete, which will win every time against aircraft aluminum wings. You notice the burned walls on the inner wall, just beyond the damage of the outer wall? I would say that's where the plane went as it hit. People think there should be an intact body just sitting up against the building, when in fact the plane would flattened up rather nicely against an immovable object. Dubbya isn't considered a fast on his feet guy, heaven forbid when told a major accident (since they likely didn't know it was an attack at that time) has occurred he sat there in a bit of a panic trying to work out what to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:46 pm
Posts: 58
Location: Seattle, Washington
I found a radio interview with Popular Mechanics. Don't know who's interviewing him, but it's interesting. It's pretty even in my opinion. But, it shows that there are sensible rebuttals to their position on 9-11. It's 20 minutes long, so it won't appeal to everyone.

http://www.apfn.net/pogo/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:06 am 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 7:18 pm
Posts: 2928
Location: SC
RachelG wrote:
Trip, I really enjoyed the links in your first post (and the possible explanations in your second post were even better). It seems clear to me that aliens must be involved somewhere - probably those green saliva-dripping ones on the Simpsons. The reason they're on the Simpsons is to fool us into thinking that they're fictional.
:D

rpsgc,

Regarding the Pentagon, did your video say the section of the pentagon hit happened to have been under renovation since 1999? So it was sparsely inhabited at the time of the impact. That's just something that hadn't been mentioned yet.

The wikipedia and popular mechanics articles were great too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:22 pm
Posts: 2465
Location: London
mr lahey wrote:
Image
We can debate for hours whether the extrusion under the 767 is standard equipment on a 767, an illusion, or a missile.


Pardon me, but why would a government hell-bent on killing its own citizens, and evidently using huge passenger jets to crash into buildings, would also need a mount a missile under the jet that -- I don't think there's doubt of that, after Naudet brothers' film, staged or not -- crashed into WTC?

mr lahey wrote:
But when it comes to this…

Image

I give up.


Uh huh. I sincerely ask -- can you find me a quote by an established civil engineer that explains what's wrong with this video? Seems rather feasible to me, then again I'm just a feeble mechie...

I'm not a blind believer in the government, but some of the arguments made by the conspirationists are quite ridiculous.

_________________
Thinkpad X200 – aging fan, T60p – Core Duo whine :(
Nothing endures but change


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:39 am 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 7:18 pm
Posts: 2928
Location: SC
Quote:
Uh huh. I sincerely ask -- can you find me a quote by an established civil engineer that explains what's wrong with this video? Seems rather feasible to me, then again I'm just a feeble mechie...
Supposedly it's falling too quickly. The official story is that fuel poured into the elevator shafts, ignited, caused other material to burn, and led to a high blaze that weakened the entire structure.

However, it should still fall more slowly as each floor provides resistance.

Quick google search came up with this article. I haven't had time to read it fully, nor am I familiar with him. I've had a lot of crazy professors, and a lot of dull professors who just teach whatever is in their textbooks. So I wouldn't trust a random physicist on his word.


Last edited by Trip on Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:54 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 110 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group