Debunked: Anatomical impossibility of Jeff Bauman photos

Tobes

Member
[mod note]
Warning: This thread contains scenes of the aftermath of the Boston Marathon Bombing.

@Trailblazer made this image which clearly debunks the claim that one of the bombing victims had "anatomically impossible" leg positions.
upload_2014-10-25_8-6-49.pngupload_2014-10-25_8-6-30.png





Original thread-opener below.
--------------------------------------
http://www.amazon.com/review/R19C4N...OI5BK9FZW1R&store=digital-text#wasThisHelpful

This guy claims Bauman is a fraud and bases his claims on Bauman being in a position "that it's anatomically impossible to be in" and the actions of Christian Williams.

There's a lot of information here, a lot of detail. I'm not good with details. All I know is that if Bauman lost his legs before the bombings or if it were another actor claiming to be Bauman, somebody would have come forward and said so.
The guy called my claim a "red herring."
How so?
 

Attachments

Last edited by a moderator:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
To be honest, I would not bother with it, unless it's a theory that is getting traction somewhere.

If you do want to get into it, you need to pick some very specific claim of evidence he's making, and quote it. Link to photos, etc.
 

JonB

New Member
http://www.amazon.com/review/R19C4N...OI5BK9FZW1R&store=digital-text#wasThisHelpful

This guy claims Bauman is a fraud and bases his claims on Bauman being in a position "that it's anatomically impossible to be in" and the actions of Christian Williams.

There's a lot of information here, a lot of detail. I'm not good with details. All I know is that if Bauman lost his legs before the bombings or if it were another actor claiming to be Bauman, somebody would have come forward and said so.
The guy called my claim a "red herring."
How so?
The reviewer's name is CitizenCSI and I found a video he made (len= 2:41) that demonstrates his point about Jeff's apparent anatomical anomaly. I have to admit, it leaves me scratching my head!

At 0:56 a sequence of (Thorndyke) images depicts Christian Williams (gray hoodie guy) taking some kind of strap from his neck and attempting to put it around Jeff's right leg.

At about 1:29 we get to the point.
Jeff's thighs at the crotch should be much closer together. They should form a "V" shape, not the "U" shape that we see. Pause at 1:43 and try to imagine where his right leg attaches to his body. It certainly can't be near his left leg, can it ?

At 1:56, a transparent 3D human model is superimposed onto Jeff showing where his right thigh should be.

The model helps to visualize the anomaly, but all you need do is to spread your own knees a foot apart and look at the relative position of your thighs near your crotch. Can you simulate the anomaly we see in the photos ?

The implication here is that what initially appears to be Jeff's right leg is actually a fake gore prosthetic.

Can you guys think of any plausible alternative explanations for this anatomical anomaly ?

Here's the link to the video.
 

Redwood

Active Member
Maybe the reviewer should have researched the perspective effect of shooting from a long distance with a telephoto lense.
 

JonB

New Member
I don't see anything anatomically incorrect there.
Do you see a big discrepancy between the position of Jeff's right leg and the model's right leg ?

If so, are you saying Jeff's right leg looks anatomically correct, but the model does not ?
 

JonB

New Member
Maybe the reviewer should have researched the perspective effect of shooting from a long distance with a telephoto lense.
What perspective effect would that be ? How could some telephoto effect make his right thigh "move over" several inches ? I know a telephoto lense can distort the perspective between near and far objects, but 2 objects close to each other will be affected equally. Therefore, a lense would not explain the unnatural distance between his thighs at the crotch.

How would you explain the discrepancy between Jeff's position and the model ?
 

NoParty

Senior Member.
I think there's only an "apparent anatomical anomaly" there if someone is motivated to see one.

The later entirely arbitrary placement of "...a transparent 3D human model..." means nothing,
if the phantasm could have been overlaid very differently and entirely plausibly...
as anyone knows who has seen the contortions real bodies make in stressful situations.

I think Mick's right: unless a bunch of people start imagining that this means something,
no reason to give it any undeserved attention. And I'll take my own advice and let this
first word from me also be my last on this...there's just no "there" there.
 

JonB

New Member
I think there's only an "apparent anatomical anomaly" there if someone is motivated to see one.

The later entirely arbitrary placement of "...a transparent 3D human model..." means nothing,
if the phantasm could have been overlaid very differently and entirely plausibly...
as anyone knows who has seen the contortions real bodies make in stressful situations.

I think Mick's right: unless a bunch of people start imagining that this means something,
no reason to give it any undeserved attention. And I'll take my own advice and let this
first word from me also be my last on this...there's just no "there" there.
Do "contortions real bodies make in stressful situations" include widening your crotch by several inches ?
Look at Jeff's left leg and estimate from that where (laterally) his crotch would be.
Then do the same with the right.
Then kindly explain how you arrive at the conclusion the crotch would be in the same location for both legs.

Let's use the frame at 1:29 where it says "Look" as an example.
If you draw a line along Jeff's inner LEFT thigh to where his crotch would be, it would be about the middle of Jeff's hair. (Give or take.)
If you draw a line along Jeff's inner RIGHT leg, you won't get to anywhere near the same location for the crotch.


The model is just an aide. It's very clear from Jeff's position alone that something is very wrong with this picture.
If you can get a friend to pose in about the same position as Jeff and take a photo that shows the same anomaly, (impossibly wide crotch) I would be very grateful.
 

JonB

New Member
What does a misplaced crotch imply? Circus freaks?
I didn't say 'misplaced'. I said his crotch looks impossibly wide, implying that the right leg cannot be his real leg.

Imagine sitting in a chair with your knees apart. Get someone to take a picture looking straight down on you.
That is similar to the viewpoint we're seeing in the video.

Take a few pics, with knees wider, with one leg raised higher than the other, etc. Then, in all those pics, do a line test like in the illustration below.
I think you'll find that in every case, the lines will intersect roughly where your crotch should be.

In Jeff's case, as shown below, the lines don't intersect anywhere near where his crotch would be.
 

Attachments

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
The apparent flaw in this using the superposition of "a transparent 3D human model" onto the actual human body image is that the model is viewed from a quite short distance, whereas the actual body image is taken from a very long distance. In the former, the upper body (head and shoulders) are disproportionally larger that the lower body, with the shoulders being about twice wider than the hips. In the latter, their proportion is close to 1:1.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Okay, so he doesn't even have residual amputated limbs? He has a detachable thighbone and is actually amputated at the pelvis?
Or maybe those overlays are not a scientifically established reference point that can be used to judge whether his limbs are detached from his body at the pelvis.

Those lines don't indicate where his crotch would be at all. Why are they being used as an accurate reference point? They're not.
His right leg is angled back more than the other one, but the line doesn't seem to take that into account.
 

JonB

New Member
The apparent flaw in this using the superposition of "a transparent 3D human model" onto the actual human body image is that the model is viewed from a quite short distance, whereas the actual body image is taken from a very long distance. In the former, the upper body (head and shoulders) are disproportionally larger that the lower body, with the shoulders being about twice wider than the hips. In the latter, their proportion is close to 1:1.
OK, but how does that affect the issue of the angle of his thighs ? An angle looks the same whether it's near or far, big or small. I think the model fits Jeff pretty well. It's to scale and the head and left leg match in size and position pretty well.
But, even given that your comment is true, I don't see how it's relevant.
Am I missing something ?
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
OK, but how does that affect the issue of the angle of his thighs ? An angle looks the same whether it's near or far, big or small. I think the model fits Jeff pretty well. It's to scale and the head and left leg match in size and position pretty well.
But, even given that your comment is true, I don't see how it's relevant.
Am I missing something ?
As I have already pointed out, the model is not anatomically correct: if it is perceived from the same distance as the actual body, the hips look too narrow. Therefore a good fit of one (left) leg means only that the other (right) leg cannot be fitted at all. In contrast, the actual body image has normal proportions of the upper and lower parts. Also, its torso, obscured by the head and shoulders, is probably tilted more than the model torso.

As for the issue of the angle of the thighs, it does not seem relevant. The thighs are attached to pelvis at the hip joints, not in the crotch, and their fleshy contours are not necessarily straight.
 

JonB

New Member
Okay, so he doesn't even have residual amputated limbs? He has a detachable thighbone and is actually amputated at the pelvis?
Or maybe those overlays are not a scientifically established reference point that can be used to judge whether his limbs are detached from his body at the pelvis.

Those lines don't indicate where his crotch would be at all. Why are they being used as an accurate reference point? They're not.
His right leg is angled back more than the other one, but the line doesn't seem to take that into account.
That one leg is angled back more doesn't matter. You'd get the same result. Your thighs are a "V", your crotch is the bottom of the "V". No matter how wide or narrow, or if one half is leaning forward or back, the lines always meet in the same place.

The 3D model is just for reference and reasonably close. It doesn't have to be exact to illustrate the point.
But you can discount it if you like. It's just meant to approximate what a normal body would look like in that position.

I said "roughly" where the crotch would be. The lines don't need to be accurate. You can move them around a little. But that won't begin to account for the discrepancy.
In both illustrations the left line crosses Jeff's head. In the model the right line does too, but the line on Jeff's right thigh doesn't come close. You'd have to put it on a grossly different angle to cross the head.
If you just look at the picture, is it not obvious that his crotch is somewhere below his head ? Do we have to know the exact spot within a millimeter ?

No one's suggesting his leg detaches at the pelvis. What is being suggested is that what we're seeing is a fake gore prosthetic that hasn't been attached to Jeff's real stump. The 3D overlay shows where the stump should be, and indeed, we see what could be his stump. Its in exactly the right place.

But, for this discussion, it doesn't matter whether that's his real stump or not.
The single issue at hand is the angle and position of his right leg being clearly anatomically incorrect.
 

JonB

New Member
As I have already pointed out, the model is not anatomically correct: if it is perceived from the same distance as the actual body, the hips look too narrow. Therefore a good fit of one (left) leg means only that the other (right) leg cannot be fitted at all. In contrast, the actual body image has normal proportions of the upper and lower parts. Also, its torso, obscured by the head and shoulders, is probably tilted more than the model torso.

As for the issue of the angle of the thighs, it does not seem relevant. The thighs are attached to pelvis at the hip joints, not in the crotch, and their fleshy contours are not necessarily straight.
We're talking about a relatively small area where the inner thighs meet in normally built people.
I've said you can move the lines around to account for the fleshy parts.
Again, if you object to the model, lets leave it out of the equation.
Respectfully, if you think the angle of the thighs is irrelevant, then you're missing the point of the evidence.

On both Jeff's legs, we see all but the last few inches of thigh. How, in those last few inches, does the top of the right leg get anywhere near the top of the left leg ?
 

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
We're talking about a relatively small area where the inner thighs meet in normally built people.
I've said you can move the lines around to account for the fleshy parts.
Again, if you object to the model, lets leave it out of the equation.
Respectfully, if you think the angle of the thighs is irrelevant, then you're missing the point of the evidence.

On both Jeff's legs, we see all but the last few inches of thigh. How, in those last few inches, does the top of the right leg get anywhere near the top of the left leg ?
I suggest you enlist the help of a friend and take some photos yourself to help you understand.

And furthermore, if "they" were using a prosthetic, why would they not attach it to a real stump? How would you attach it half a leg-width too far right? It makes no sense even from a conspiracy point of view.
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
We're talking about a relatively small area where the inner thighs meet in normally built people.
I've said you can move the lines around to account for the fleshy parts.
Again, if you object to the model, lets leave it out of the equation.
Respectfully, if you think the angle of the thighs is irrelevant, then you're missing the point of the evidence.

On both Jeff's legs, we see all but the last few inches of thigh. How, in those last few inches, does the top of the right leg get anywhere near the top of the left leg ?
OK, here is a picture of a man lying on a beach in a similar position:
Screen shot 2014-10-20 at 10.32.11.png

(a crop from a larger photograph: https://www.flickr.com/photos/thomashawk/6820184045/)

I am returning you your question: "does the top of the right leg get anywhere near the top of the left leg?"
 

Ray Von Geezer

Senior Member.
I didn't say 'misplaced'. I said his crotch looks impossibly wide, implying that the right leg cannot be his real leg.

Imagine sitting in a chair with your knees apart. Get someone to take a picture looking straight down on you.
That is similar to the viewpoint we're seeing in the video.

Take a few pics, with knees wider, with one leg raised higher than the other, etc. Then, in all those pics, do a line test like in the illustration below.
I think you'll find that in every case, the lines will intersect roughly where your crotch should be.
Do you mean the lines will "intersect with the crotch", not with each other?

There's no way the lines can intersect at the crotch, unless the distance between the top of the thighs is zero, like say in a stick man drawing. For example, standing with my feet approximately 2ft apart the distance between the top of my thighs is about 2.5in, lines drawn from my knees along my thigh would intersect just below my navel.

Ray Von
 

GregMc

Senior Member.
Sorry JohB, but the video makes no sense. (As a bit of background I'm a Digital VFX supervisor and animatronics prosthetics professional. I match 3D characters to filmed environments as part of my profession as well as work with prosthetic effects.)

The 3D character simply has a different amount of outwards leg splay , ie , the KNEES have not been adjusted to match the injured person and so the angle of the inner thighs are not aligned and are not comparable. I see no evidence the pelvis has been aligned with the position of the victim. Also there is no evidence the 3D character is an accurate body proportion match and the camera lens doesn't appear to have been matched. There is no evidence that there has been any attempt to accurately match the perspective of the ground plane in the 3D environment to the ground in the photographed environment so that the 3D character is lying at the correct angle. That's VFX 101 and there is no muscle sim in the model and so the thigh muscles are not modelled and the distorting effect of the woman lying against his thigh muscles is not taken into account, nor simply the weight of his muscles under the effect of gravity. Using that model is like trying to use a store mannequin to prove a point in anatomy
Sorry , but totally unconvincing.
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
Do you want to try the "line test" on this photo?

View attachment 9683

(Honestly, the things I do for truth... ;) )
So, below I have put lines on that photo. Notice how they intersect even below the floor level.


legs.jpg


I took this photo myself, holding my phone right in front of my face. But imagine if the photo had been taken from further away, with my head visible in front of my stomach. The intersection of the lines would have been well below my head. Rough and ready approximation using Bauman's head from the video screengrab:

legs2.jpg


Incidentally I don't really agree with the line placement for the right leg on the Bauman photo. On this version I have outlined the outside edge of the thigh. Notice how on the left leg, the yellow line on the inner edge forms an angle as you would expect, with the upper end of the thing being wider. But on the right leg, the yellow line had been drawn more or less parallel with the outside edge of the thigh. Applying a similar perspective as the left leg would yield a line more like the blue one I have added here. But the video quality is so poor, and the damage to the leg so extensive, that trying to draw accurate conclusions is pretty pointless.

bauman.jpg

Also the person in the video mentions a "black device" between Bauman's legs, which anybody can see is simply his black trousers which were shredded and bundled up around his upper legs. That can be verified in photos from the other angle.

Remember, these photos are from Ben Thorndike's series taken in "burst mode". Look at the chaotic activity and speed at which things are happening. Does this really look like somebody "attaching prosthetics"?

iDEkOrZ.gif

(Source: http://wideshut.co.uk/review-of-jef...ton-bombing-conspiracy-theory-graphic-images/)
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Moderator
Staff member
That might explain it, but I've seen zero evidence for that either in photos or interviews I've seen and read.
If you find any, then you've solved the conundrum.
I don't think there is any conundrum. I can assure you that my hip isn't dislocated.
 

JonB

New Member
I suggest you enlist the help of a friend and take some photos yourself to help you understand.

And furthermore, if "they" were using a prosthetic, why would they not attach it to a real stump? How would you attach it half a leg-width too far right? It makes no sense even from a conspiracy point of view.
Thanks, but I already understand, and hope we all will after I address the other comments.

All I'll say now in answer to your question is that the prosthetic was being prepared to be placed on Jeff's real stump, which is to the left of the prosthetic. Lets stick to the issue of the angle and position of the leg.
 

JonB

New Member
Sorry JohB, but the video makes no sense. (As a bit of background I'm a Digital VFX supervisor and animatronics prosthetics professional. I match 3D characters to filmed environments as part of my profession as well as work with prosthetic effects.)

The 3D character simply has a different amount of outwards leg splay , ie , the KNEES have not been adjusted to match the injured person and so the angle of the inner thighs are not aligned and are not comparable. I see no evidence the pelvis has been aligned with the position of the victim. Also there is no evidence the 3D character is an accurate body proportion match and the camera lens doesn't appear to have been matched. There is no evidence that there has been any attempt to accurately match the perspective of the ground plane in the 3D environment to the ground in the photographed environment so that the 3D character is lying at the correct angle. That's VFX 101 and there is no muscle sim in the model and so the thigh muscles are not modelled and the distorting effect of the woman lying against his thigh muscles is not taken into account, nor simply the weight of his muscles under the effect of gravity. Using that model is like trying to use a store mannequin to prove a point in anatomy
Sorry , but totally unconvincing.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. You're right about the knees. Now imagine the model's right knee is moved so its over Jeff's knee. Can you see that at the crotch, the top of the thighs would still be in close proximity, unlike the image of Jeff.

I'll say again... The model was meant only as a visual aid, and is totally unnecessary to prove my point.
Apparently, the model is only confusing the situation here, so lets leave it out of the equation.
 

JonB

New Member
Trailblazer, thanks for your pics. That's more the type of response I was hoping for here.

The views of Jeff are more or less along his centre vertical axis. He's hunched over a bit but that's OK...we have a bit of wiggle room here - we don't have to be accurate to the millimeter.

The view of the guy on the beach is too far to the right to be comparable to the view of Jeff.

Hold the phone...Mick just sent some good pics that are much closer the correct viewpoint, so I'll address those.
 

Ray Von Geezer

Senior Member.
That might explain it, but I've seen zero evidence for that either in photos or interviews I've seen and read.
If you find any, then you've solved the conundrum.
If the photo showed the leg as being out of position (personally I don't think it does, that seems to be based on obviously incorrect assumptions about the lines crossing in the crotch), then that could be evidence of the joint being dislocated, couldn't it?

I don't think it'd be too odd for it not to be mentioned in an interview. Given that the rest of the leg was blown off, bringing up a hip dislocation might seem a little redundant.

Ray Von
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
The view of the guy on the beach is too far to the right to be comparable to the view of Jeff.
This view is sufficient to debunk both your arguments. One, it shows the actual proportions of a male human body when it is viewed from the top from a long distance. Two, it show that there is nothing wrong with the thighs' positions and orientations in both images:
male body comparison.png
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I don't understand the point that JonB nor the video creator are trying to make. What is the importance?
They think it proves the legs in the image were prosthetics, and hence proof that the Boston Bombings were "staged".

Subsequent analysis proves them wrong. And of course it was a pretty weak argument anyway, with the vast amount of other evidence that things happened as we were told (and saw). I hesitated to even address it, but maybe it will make people such as JonB think again before falling for such specious claims.
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
upload_2014-10-21_6-19-41.png

The only way the lines of the bones can intersect at the crotch is in an extreme lotus position. Though you seem to be concentrating on the hang of the inner thigh, this at least demonstrates how far apart the actual bone structure from which the thighs hang are from each other.
The meat of the thigh is not a solid and will hang and move according to position and gravity, it's just not an adequate indicator to suggest what is being suggested here.
 

ColtCabana

Senior Member
They think it proves the legs in the image were prosthetics, and hence proof that the Boston Bombings were "staged".

Subsequent analysis proves them wrong. And of course it was a pretty weak argument anyway, with the vast amount of other evidence that things happened as we were told (and saw). I hesitated to even address it, but maybe it will make people such as JonB think again before falling for such specious claims.
The evidence to prove the point, at least in this thread, is at best, reaching. If Jeff Bauman was wearing prosthetics, surely a simple picture could be found of Mr. Bauman showing evidence of prosthetics before the Marathon happened.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
N Debunked: Google Mail icon shows linkage to Freemasons Conspiracy Theories 0
Mendel Debunked: The WHO did not take the Taiwan CDC seriously Coronavirus COVID-19 0
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mendel Debunked: Radar Waves Affect Clouds General Discussion 0
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 13
M Ufos arrive to the central zone of Chile. (Debunked). Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Jesse3959 FE Debunked with water tube level - 187 foot building 21.2 miles away below eye level Flat Earth 0
H Debunked: Cadillac Mountain from 220 miles Flat Earth 7
Jesse3959 FE Claim Debunked: JTolan Epic Gravity Experiment - Flat earther disproves Perspective! (or his instruments.) Flat Earth 0
Mick West Debunked: DoD prepares for martial law in CONUS: Conspiracy Theories 0
Oystein Debunked: AE911T: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana claims Building 7 a Controlled Implosion 9/11 13
A Debunked: NASA tampered with the original television audio of the Apollo 11 moon landing Conspiracy Theories 1
Greylandra Debunked: media headline "Judea declares war on Germany" [boycott] Conspiracy Theories 20
Mick West Discovery Channel's "Contact: Declassified Breakthrough" was debunked 2.5 years ago UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Joe Hill Debunked: "The North Face of Building 7 Was Pulled Inward" 9/11 66
A Debunked : Fake Set Moon Landing with TV Camera and Stairs Conspiracy Theories 3
Mick West Debunked: Photo with Sun Rays at Odd Angles Flat Earth 0
Staffan Debunked: Wikileaks releases unused footage of moon landing (Capricorn One movie scenes) Conspiracy Theories 2
Mick West Debunked: Neil deGrasse Tyson : "That Stuff is Flat" Flat Earth 10
Mendel Debunked: Air Map of the World 1945 is a flat Earth map Flat Earth 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Trees being cut down "because they block 5G" (tree replacement in Belgium) 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 44
deirdre Debunked: Exemption from military service doc proves Jews had foreknowledge of WW2 (fake leaflet) General Discussion 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Obama called Michelle "Michael" in a speech. (Referring to Michael Mullen Jr) Quotes Debunked 0
Rory Debunked: 120-mile shot of San Jacinto proves flat earth Flat Earth 39
Rory Debunked: The Lunar Cycle affects birth rates Health and Quackery 26
Rory Debunked: Study shows link between menstrual cycle and the moon Health and Quackery 30
novatron Debunked: California Wildfires Match the Exactly Path of the Proposed Rail System Wildfires 3
Rory Debunked: "You must love yourself before you love another" - fake Buddha quote Quotes Debunked 7
W Debunked: Qanon claims there have been 51k sealed indictments filed this year. Current Events 11
K Debunked: Audio of David Rockefeller "leaked" speech in 1991 [Audio Simulation] General Discussion 2
tadaaa Debunked: Fake photos-Novichok attack Russian 'agents' (side by side gates) General Discussion 34
Mick West Debunked: XYO Device Replacing GPS, Saving $2 Million a Day General Discussion 23
Mick West Debunked: "Tip Top" as a QAnon Clue from Trump [He's said it before] Conspiracy Theories 3
Whitebeard Debunked: Nibiru FOUND? Mysterious gigantic rogue planet spotted lurking outside our solar system Science and Pseudoscience 1
Mick West Debunked: "There Exists a Shadowy Government" — Daniel Inouye Quotes Debunked 0
Mick West Debunked: Delta Lambda Compression General Discussion 16
MisterB Debunked: Isle of Man from Blackpool at water level proves flat earth [refraction] Flat Earth 19
JFDee Debunked: Wernher von Braun confirmed that rockets can't leave earth Conspiracy Theories 23
Mick West Debunked: Missing $21 Trillion / $6.5 Trillion / $2.3 Trillion - Journal Vouchers Conspiracy Theories 33
MikeG Debunked: Obamacare Article 54 (Satire FB Page) General Discussion 2
Mick West Debunked: "Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to Earth’s Surface:" [Stray Light] Contrails and Chemtrails 30
Astro Debunked: Apollo Lunar Module Hatch Too Small for Spacesuit Science and Pseudoscience 0
Mick West Debunked: NIST's Lack of Explanation for WTC7 Freefall [They Have One - Column Buckling] 9/11 38
Jedo Debunked: WTC7 was the only building not on the WTC block that had a fire on 9/11 9/11 0
Mick West Debunked: Thermite Slag on WTC beams [Oxy Cutting Slag] 9/11 2
Mick West Debunked: The WTC 9/11 Angle Cut Column. [Not Thermite, Cut Later] 9/11 137
Mick West Debunked: AE911Truth's Analysis of Slag Residue from WTC Debris 9/11 20
Dan Wilson Debunked: Steven Crowder: The AIDS epidemic was a hoax Health and Quackery 9
Dan Wilson Debunked: Infowars product damages sperm Health and Quackery 2
Mick West Debunked: Corbett Report Targeted by Google/Youtube Conspiracy Theories 37
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top