Comments by "Tom tonka" (@tomtonka1915) on "BBC News" channel.

What a wonderful video. May I be one of the first to say what an amazing man you are!!! Giving up your time and love for these vulnerable animals is such a remarkable thing to do. You sir, are a one in a million and I thank God everyday that there are people like you who are willing to lend their hearts to such a worthy cause. The images in this video really did warm my heart and bring a tear to my eye. Thank you so much for all you are doing and God bless.
878
For the last time it's not a dollar. It's a dollarydoo.
3
+Howard Johnson Wow you are one whacky folk. Spouting off a load of bullshit that you know isn't even remotely true. Not one of your claims has ever been proven and casually browsing over them most of the things you have stated as fact are incorrect. 16 years since the event and not a single conspiracy claim has ever been proven to be true. Move on, it's getting old.
2
@LogicPak Well a word of advice. Don't get on a plane with that pilot. I would be very suspicious of a pilot that couldn't hit a target that was wider than the runway he was supposed to be landing on. Al-Qaida did it, the evidence is overwhelming.
2
+ZeitLan Inc. American language?
1
ZeitLan Inc. lol and you probably wonder why the rest of the world laughs at you.
1
First the twoofie claims are that fire can't collapse a steel framed building and then it happens again so they conveniently change their claims to well it can't happen symetrically. You idiots just make it up as you go along, that's why nobody takes you seriously.
1
Well why do 99% of the world's physicists and architects and engineers say that it is completely plausible? Are you claiming to be more knowledgable than them on the matter?
1
Doesn't matter. If you aren't educated in the subject then your opinion means jackshit, no matter how long you have studied the subject for. That's why I don't claim to be an expert on the subject of the collapses, I take the word of the vast majority of experts.Plus you are obviously only studying reports by the ae911 conspiracy theorists, that's called confirmation bias. My source is that ae911 only has roughly 2000 members, and they count ANY type of architects and engineer, not just highrise structure professionals. There are nearly 2.5 million a&e in the US alone. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes170000.htm So I was actually being generous with my figure, it is probably closer to 99.9%.
1
From your very own link: "However, the informal fallacy occurs only when the authority cited either (a) is not an authority, or (b) is not an authority on the subject on which he is being cited." I am citing the people who are authorities on the matter, therefore there is no logical fallacy I'm afraid. What a bullshit argument to try and put forward. I'll bet you think you sounded really smart too. Also good to know you don't think you need an education on the subject to act as though you are an authority on it. All it would take to blow this conspiracy wide open is for Richard Gage and his buddies to write a peer reviewed scientific journal on the matter, they would be heroes. But they are far more comfortable collecting money and giving talks to gullible uni students. Keep sending him your money, he thanks you.
1
Oh please the right to vote and being an authority on a subject are world's apart. You might not like it, but your opinion on whether the buildings can collapse like that really do mean jackshit. If it makes you feel any better then neither does mine. That's why I choose to take the word of the vast majority of people who are experts in this field. I don't often repeat myself, but just for you: All it would take to blow this conspiracy wide open is for Richard Gage and his buddies to write a peer reviewed scientific journal on the matter, they would be heroes. But they are far more comfortable collecting money and giving talks to gullible uni students. Keep sending him your money, he thanks you.
1
They fell nowhere near freefall speed. You can see rubble and bits of the towers that are falling much faster than the collapse is happening. This was one of the easiest myths to debunk. Writing a big paragraph doesn't change that. lol. And you have the hide to lecture people on what is in front of their own eyes. Comical. http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm http://www.911myths.com/html/freefall.html
1
No, I never said that. We were talking about the towers. You know, the ones you lied about falling at 98-99% of freefall speed. And now you are passing yourself off as a physicist. You haven't actually dismantled a single thing I've said, quite the opposite actually. Real physicists get quite a good laugh out of people like you.
1
Oh my goodness. Thank you for telling me, I'll have to rethink my life now all thanks to you. You seem to be particularly stupid so let me try to explain it as simply as I can. It has been 16 years since the event. Not one twoofer has ever written a peer reviewed scientific journal on the matter. Not one physicist has ever written a paper on how the towers can't collapse like that. Coming to Youtube and saying blah blah Newton's third law blah blah freefall acceleration means nothing. If you want to use science as an argument and be taken seriously this is what you must do, however not one person has EVER done this. Not once. Zip, nada, zilch. The entire twoof movement consists of idiots like you on Youtube acting as though you are an authority on everything from architecture to physics to engineering to piloting aircraft. It is the art of spreading lies and I can find examples of it in every twoofer inside job video and website that ever existed. It really is pathetic. There's a very simple reason nobody takes you seriously, if you can't figure it out then there is no hope for you.
1
Chris Ice If you honestly think that then I suggest you re-read the thread. Very short memory you have there. Still waiting on that peer reviewed report. Let me know when it's out. I'll wait.
1
here you go mate, this link explains exactly why eyewitnesses and firefighters said what they did. I hope you take the time to read it, it's quite interesting to see just how far the "truth" movement will go to speak bullshit. https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/whattheyheard
1
lol still so many idiots desperately holding onto their insane 9\11 controlled demolition conspiracy theories. You nutjobs have never been able to prove any of your asinine claims.😂😂😂
1
@Timothy 2:2:3 If I need to tell you then you probably aren't very smart to begin with, and I'm not really sure what you are implying either. Nevertheless, when 2 buildings have planes purposfully crash into them and then collapse, there are some amazing forces involved....I think you can figure out the answer to your question from here, I believe in you.
1
@Timothy 2:2:3 Ok, I've woken up now, great sleep. I honestly thought you would figure it out. They were pulverised into nothing but blood and tiny fragments when they collapsed. I have to ask.....What were you implying happened to them?
1
@Timothy 2:2:3 Why should I? I already answered your question. If I were to answer your latest question you would just keep asking questions. Tell you what, I will answer it if you answer the question I asked. We'll take turns, your turn to answer.
1
@Timothy 2:2:3You rest your case?LMAO well you would lose if this was a courtroom. You think the thermite is what pulverised them into nothing? And not the 110 storey skyscraper collapsing? How much of this stuff do you think there was lol? Do you have any idea how long and how much work would go into rigging a building that size for demolition? The B-52 that hit the empire state building was travelling much, much slower and didn't have a full tank of fuel. The incidents are nothing alike. The hijackers all had their pilot's license, and those "cave dwellers" were college educated in Germany and got their pilot's license in the USA. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhDNy5LAo5o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6g2egWQ7pU It's true he had some problems landing a cessna he had never flown before but he had no intention of landing the plane anyway, it's quite easy to just steer a plane. What do you mean the sky patrols were doing exercises? Do you think all of them were or something? If so I would like to see some proof. And even if some of them were why is it so unusual? I'm sure the airforce regularly conducts exercises. There is a shot of a plane hitting the pentagon, sure it's grainy but cameras,especially surveilance cameras weren't as good back then. Do you expect the Pentagon to have cameras just randomly pointing off into the sky or something? The fire burned for so long because there was alot of material, have never heard of the basement turning to molten rock, but molten materials are a side effect of fires, I'm surprised you can't figure this all out by yourself tbh. Most of the points you bring up are easily found if you were to do your research.
1
@Timothy 2:2:3 Come on bro it's your turn to answer. I was just starting to enjoy our friendship.
1
@Timothy 2:2:3 Well i answered a bunch of yours and asked you a bunch in my last comment.
1