Abbie Richards on Twitter
twitter.com
Conspiracy theories are everywhere and people don't understand how harmful they are. I made the original Conspiracy Chart over a year ago. An update was long overdue. This is the 2021 version. pic.twitter.com/c8STog1JUW— Abbie Richards (@abbieasr) November 23, 2021

world ruled by supreme shadow elite. promotes hatred and violence towards marginalized groups

:what: how is this not real???

Epstein didn't kill himself, JFK Assassination, Iran Contra (leaving reality)

:wut:

    • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Yes I have. What you consider "research" is just fringe nonsense: and I say that as someone who 100% believes Epstein didn't kill himself.

      • Redbolshevik2 [he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Lol no you quite obviously haven't, because you said that "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" is a wacky conspiracy theory when it's literally in the official report.

        • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          “Jet fuel doesn’t melt steel beams” is a direct quote on the conspiracy chart bruh.

          • Redbolshevik2 [he/him]
            ·
            3 years ago

            Then you get to the far more speculative or outright bad science stuff like controlled demolition, or “Jet fuel doesn’t melt steel beams”.

            So you agree with the chart

            • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
              ·
              3 years ago

              Not all of it. In fact I might dispute its placement on the chart a bit, but I'm just saying that's what I was directly quoting.

              I do agree that people who argue over whether or not "Jet fuel can melt steel beams" are missing the forest for the trees and tend to be deep in the conspiracy/bad science pipeline because they seem to think that this somehow that proves the planes and fire alone couldn't have made the towers collapse when everything I've seen and researched has made it clear that its by far the simplest and most logical explanation.

              • Redbolshevik2 [he/him]
                ·
                3 years ago

                Lol

                Can you show me this research?

                If the strongest steel building to ever exist was destroyed by fire, I'd think we'd have updated architectural codes for steel buildings. Do those exist?

                • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  Can you show me this research?

                  https://www.nist.gov/el/final-reports-nist-world-trade-center-disaster-investigation

                  To sum up from the FAQ

                  1. The impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and
                  2. The subsequent unusually large number of jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius, or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers.

                  So yeah: jet fuel combined with tons of office equipment with a shit ton of heat release which burned at insane temperatures for a hella long time led to the collapse of the buildings structural integrity and down they went.

                  If the strongest steel building to ever exist was destroyed by fire, I’d think we’d have updated architectural codes for steel buildings. Do those exist?

                  I don't know, I'm not an architect. I just listen to them.

                    • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
                      ·
                      3 years ago

                      Lmao this is literally the official story. Gonna link me the Warren commission on JFK next? Fucking incurious loser lmao.

                      It being the "official story" doesn't mean it isn't true, and the fact that that's your go to position is very revealing. Again: Jet fuel burning for hours in contained spaces over multiple floors mixed with tons of other computer and office equipment weakened the structural integrity of the buildings and they collapsed.

                          • Redbolshevik2 [he/him]
                            ·
                            3 years ago

                            Guy who believes the US government:

                            "Maybe try being a little skeptical"

                            You haven't watched the video. Irredeemable American.

                            • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
                              ·
                              3 years ago

                              Guy who believes everything he sees in a dumb youtube video:

                              "Shut the fuck up you incurious savage."

                              Lol, I'd bet money you're exactly the sort of person who built an identity around that godawful "Zeitgeist" film back in the early 00s.

                              • Redbolshevik2 [he/him]
                                ·
                                3 years ago

                                You literally cited the US government report and then asserted that it's not relevant that the US government commissioned it. World's smartest American lmao.

                                • Ericthescruffy [he/him]
                                  ·
                                  3 years ago

                                  Oh god I'm right aren't I?!? You were that guy weren't you? And you're still that guy now!!!!

                                  • Redbolshevik2 [he/him]
                                    ·
                                    3 years ago

                                    No I believed the stupid incurious bullshit that you do before I investigated the subject.

                        • TankieTanuki [he/him]
                          ·
                          3 years ago

                          Be kind, comrade. I'm with you, but you won't win much support with this tone. :meow-hug:

                  • TankieTanuki [he/him]
                    ·
                    3 years ago

                    Here's what I don't understand about the NIST: why won't they release the raw data for their computer models so that independent researchers can verify their simulation? Science is literally about being as open as possible. It would be in their interest to better communicate their knowledge to the public and put these theories to rest. They claim that releasing the data would be a threat to "national security". Is that really true? How does knowing how to demolish a building which no longer exists pose a threat? In order to prevent a 9/11, all you have to do is secure the airplanes, which they've already done.

        • TankieTanuki [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          In the context of the chart, "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" is obviously a stand-in for "WTC was a controlled demolition" or all 9/11 theories more broadly.