Powered by i.TV
October 25, 2014

I actually thought Rosie had a degree in physics - VIDEO

by Adam Finley, posted Apr 4th 2007 7:24PM

WTCLike many of you, I always assumed that Rosie O'Donnell had a masters in physics. I mean, why else would she be spouting off on national television that the WTC 7 was probably destroyed by a controlled detonation?

I actually make it a point to refer to Rosie's wisdom on every question I have in life. Right now I have a cold cheese sandwich sitting in my kitchen, but I'm not going to grill it until I find out from Rosie for certain that heat will melt cheese. She seems to have an understanding of these things my simple mind can't quite grasp.

At any rate, Popular Mechanics, just as it had done previously, explains to Rosie, and to everyone else, why the towers fell the way they did.

To be honest, I'm less concerned with Rosie's ignorant statement and more concerned with the audience members who applauded her after she said it (see the clip below). The View is based on the idea of people yakking first and thinking later, but it does concern me that people would accept what she said with blind faith.

I'm not an expert on physics, and the fact that you're currently reading a television blog and not a scientific journal should prove that. However, all of us have to accept what experts tell us to some degree: if I go to a doctor, I have to accept he knows what he's talking about. Of course, opinions may vary from one doctor (or any other expert) to another, and the more one educates themselves on a subject, the better. At this point, however, I think every theory that assumes WTC 7 was brought down by explosives has been sufficiently disproved in the scientific realm, and not just by one rogue scientist, but by many. This is Rosie versus overall scientific consensus, and it seems fairly clear to me where to place my trust.

[via TV Filter]

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

45 Comments

Filter by:
Peter

I haven't bothered to read the articleand don't know who the idiot who wrote the article is.

9/11 was an inside job.Anyone claiming otherwise is a moron or a liar or both.The stupid and ignorant comments following the article are a sad comment on how low the intellect of the average sheeple has fallen.

The fusellage of a 767 is about 1.25 mm thick and the reinforcing stringers and frames are not much thicker.Alclad,the alloy that fusellage panels are made has one third the rigidity of steel.Yet "UA 175" slid through the South Tower without slowing down.It disobeyed Newton's laws of motion.It cut through dozens of inch thick steel columns without suffering any damage to itself.

It was faked footage.The NWO has absolute contempt for the sheeple,and given the quality of the letters I really don't blame the.

June 06 2007 at 11:41 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Rae

Dawn, Joel and erroneous_nick

what's up? water is wet....can you at least agree on that? LOL :o)

Ya-hoo for freedom of speech....without THAT....NONE of you would have a forum for discussion.

April 06 2007 at 11:46 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
erroneous_nick

Joel,

Dawn was only expressing her opinions about how she feels over some of the more outrageous comments regarding Rosie. She was supporting Rosie's right to free speech and how she has a problem with others' differing opinions. She's only tolerant of the free speech that she agrees with, such as Rosie's incessant ramblings and can't understand why in the world we'd conclude that she's somehow disturbed. Dawn's in agreement with Rosie, but would rather try and make comments disagreeing with her look like an attack on free speech since it's much easier to argue in favor of a constitutional right than it is to support an angry idiot.

We had people from the political left, right, middle and everywhere else agreeing that Rosie's an uninformed, opinionated loudmouth. Dawn happens to vehemently disagree and takes issue with our natural conclusion that she must be somewhat emotionally unhinged for supporting Rosie. And yet, she cannot directly support Rosie, only her right to speak out and that's simply not what the anti-Rosie comments were about, but when you try to support the un-supportable, misdirection is all you've got. Hence her bringing up the war, the recent story about squalid conditions at a veterans' hospital, attacking political ideologies, etc.

In all seriousness, that was Dawn's best and only approach. In the political world they call that "spin".

April 06 2007 at 10:30 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Dawn50

Um...Joel?

Once again, I will ask you to go back and read my posts - you seem to have difficulty with comprehension. Perhaps you could try reading without moving your lips.

What I was defending was Rosie's right to free speech without people being so insecure with her opinion that they felt she should be blown up, or somehow muzzled.

Now, please point out how you extrapolated from that that I agree with her WTC stance.

As for supporting the troops, let's not pretend that they are somehow fighting for our free speech in Iraq. What they are doing over there has nothing to do with us - they are getting killed for nothing now.
And if they make it, they get welcomed home by an administration that cuts their benefits, or can't even give them a place to recuperate from serious injury that isn't vermin infested.

Any time you want to talk about travesty in this country, you let me know. And guess what? It has nothing to do with Rosie's opinion.



April 06 2007 at 8:11 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Joel

Dawn, just because a person thinks that the conspiracy theories are ridiculous doesn't mean that he or she is a republican. I don't know nick, maybe he's as red-state as they come, but I would venture to say that a majority of ALL Americans (dems, repubs, everyone in between) thinks that you and your nutcase friends are big loons. Do you and Rosie O'Donnell have the right to be big loons? Sure, in fact we as a nation will continue to support a military that will fight for your loony rights. But no less loony will thou be. And don't try and be the voice for liberalism (if that's what you're trying to do by picking fights with who you think are O'Reilly fans) ... cuz I'll give you a clue- most rational liberals don't want to be associated with you either.

April 06 2007 at 1:55 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Dawn50

Nick,

I have to wonder - did you give yourself the moniker "Erroneous," or, more likely, was it planted on you by those who know you and are painfully aware of your usual stance on almost any issue?

As for a tinfoil beanie - that's a new one on me. I wonder how you know so much about it. But I am sure that it would make a nice addition for your collection of propellor ones - maybe you can wear one the next time you attend a taping of The O'Reilly Factor.

It would be a great way for you wingnuts to recognize each other. Of course, the free-floating look of lunacy is usually the dead giveaway.

April 05 2007 at 5:44 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
LC

Tom B-

Buildings don't really topple over like a wooden block. If their structural supports are compromised they collapse under their own wait and thanks to gravity fall straight down.

One thing that the conspiracy theorists never really explain is that if all those buildings did indeed have explosives laced throughout them, then how in the hell did they do it? Did Tom in accounting somehow miss those dozens of blocks of C4 or Thermite behind the copy machine and in the coffee room? Did building security ring up the elevators for them to wheel in hundreds of pounds of explosives up to the precise floor that the planes would hit?

I don't think any of these nutballs really know the amount of planning and execution used to make a controlled demolition. They can't just lay their explosives in any old place. They have to have specific locations. Locations that may be in plain site where anyone who works there would say "hmm what the hell is that doing there?"

Common sense will also tell anyone that no one can keep a secret. This is not a movie. This administration and other administrations have had leaks worse than the Titanic that made themselves look bad. It would be next to impossible to keep something like this under wraps, especially with the two parties at each others throats.

These people are as foolish as those that believe the moon landing was a hoax. Oh wait. Maybe it was....

http://stuffucanuse.com/fake_moon_landings/moon_landings.htm

April 05 2007 at 3:15 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Jonathan

Why is nobody in the traditional media holding Rosie responsible for what she says?

Oh thats the other side to freedom of speech, responsibility for your words. If i was up there spouting hate speech, youd bet your ass id be arrested and held accountable for what i said.

Why is this any different?

Anyway, i dont believe in any of the conspiracies in the first place. Seriously think about it, our gubment planning something so complex and keeping secret to this day? Right, and our government cant even hide the wiretapping program which was supposed to have been top secret.

April 05 2007 at 2:21 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
TomB

I don't pretend to understand this. I don't know what to believe. What bothers me is that building number 7 fell into its own footprint perfectly like a controlled demolition and that the BBC reported that it collapsed before it actually did.

It raises questions that I don't know the answers to.

April 05 2007 at 1:57 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
erroneous_nick

Adam has a knack for picking topics that engender very lively commentary, doesn't he?

I wonder if he does this on purpose? :o)

April 05 2007 at 11:16 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply

Follow Us

From Our Partners