911 WTC 7 Silent Thermate Demolition, Debunkers Grab Your Ankles!

[n0spam4me]

and do you have an actual rebuttal rather than simply to name it as wrong?
Logic, Reason, Laws of Physics ..... what?

Laws of vision -- we all saw it happen.

[/thread]

So if you saw some dood on TV pull a rabbit out of a hat, you would simply admire the magic, no?

We're not talking parlor magic tricks here. We're talking about a plane flying into a building, the building exploding, and then collapsing. You let me know when David Copperfield figures that one out.

The parlor magic is in full play, the perpetrators made 4 commercial airliners disappear, good trick that......

How'd they do that with a million eye witnesses?

oh, ...... now its a MILLION eye witnesses .... oh my!
and all of these million eye witnesses saw it on TV right?
and as we all know the TV would NEVER lie to us......

 

[SAYIT]

Laws of vision -- we all saw it happen.

[/thread]

So if you saw some dood on TV pull a rabbit out of a hat, you would simply admire the magic, no?

We're not talking parlor magic tricks here. We're talking about a plane flying into a building, the building exploding, and then collapsing. You let me know when David Copperfield figures that one out.

The parlor magic is in full play, the perpetrators made 4 commercial airliners disappear, good trick that......

How'd they do that with a million eye witnesses?

oh, ...... now its a MILLION eye witnesses .... oh my!
and all of these million eye witnesses saw it on TV right?
and as we all know the TV would NEVER lie to us......

Our MS media reported and broadcast what they were seeing as it transpired! No one reported seeing anything different than what millions of us witnessed on TV as it transpired!
Those on the ground and in other buildings also reported the same and recorded it on their personal cameras as it transpired and the evidence, as so carefully posted by Skylar and others, supports what so many people saw that day!
Pretending all but you and a handful of pathetic "Truthers" were engaged in some gymormous conspiracy to kill thousands that day - without a shred of evidence to support your pretentions - is still just pretending.

 

[Faun]

Laws of vision -- we all saw it happen.

[/thread]

So if you saw some dood on TV pull a rabbit out of a hat, you would simply admire the magic, no?

We're not talking parlor magic tricks here. We're talking about a plane flying into a building, the building exploding, and then collapsing. You let me know when David Copperfield figures that one out.

The parlor magic is in full play, the perpetrators made 4 commercial airliners disappear, good trick that......

How'd they do that with a million eye witnesses?

oh, ...... now its a MILLION eye witnesses .... oh my!
and all of these million eye witnesses saw it on TV right?
and as we all know the TV would NEVER lie to us......

No, I'm not even talking about people who saw it on TV. I'm talking about people who saw it happen live. I admit, I am just estimating. But there are about 8 million living in NYC with about 3 million living in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and New Jersey who had a clear vision of the Twin Towers. It was, and is, one of the nation's most densely populated regions. Undoubtedly, many of those roughly 4 million people were watching it live when the second plane struck the tower. At the very least, it could have been in the hundreds of thousands.

So how did someone pull off a magic trick of unprecedented magnitude by fooling so many people into believing they saw (and heard) a plane fly into the south tower?

 

[daws101]

the previous is denial at it's finest ....

and do you have an actual rebuttal rather than simply to name it as wrong?
Logic, Reason, Laws of Physics ..... what?

Laws of vision -- we all saw it happen.

[/thread]

So if you saw some dood on TV pull a rabbit out of a hat, you would simply admire the magic, no?

We're not talking parlor magic tricks here. We're talking about a plane flying into a building, the building exploding, and then collapsing. You let me know when David Copperfield figures that one out.

The parlor magic is in full play, the perpetrators made 4 commercial airliners disappear, good trick that......

only in your delusional reality

 

[n0spam4me]

only in your delusional reality

Got a question 4 U
What does this mean - - -
"as to the frame speed 2.25 sec = 60 frames the .25 is 1/4 of a sec = 1 quarter frame for all practical purposes it's useless"

 

[daws101]

only in your delusional reality

Got a question 4 U
What does this mean - - -
"as to the frame speed 2.25 sec = 60 frames the .25 is 1/4 of a sec = 1 quarter frame for all practical purposes it's useless"

wtc7

 

[SFC Ollie]

Wow, still proving there were planes...
Somehow I'm almost glad I'm not stopping by here so often...
I see the nuts are still nuts...
Carry on my friends...

 

[n0spam4me]

only in your delusional reality

Got a question 4 U
What does this mean - - -
"as to the frame speed 2.25 sec = 60 frames the .25 is 1/4 of a sec = 1 quarter frame for all practical purposes it's useless"

wtc7

How about just a bit of detail as to exactly what you mean, its not difficult to discern that its about WTC7, but as to the bit
"for all practical purposes it's useless" WHY stick this in there and exactly what does it refer to?

 

[daws101]

only in your delusional reality

Got a question 4 U
What does this mean - - -
"as to the frame speed 2.25 sec = 60 frames the .25 is 1/4 of a sec = 1 quarter frame for all practical purposes it's useless"

wtc7

How about just a bit of detail as to exactly what you mean, its not difficult to discern that its about WTC7, but as to the bit
"for all practical purposes it's useless" WHY stick this in there and exactly what does it refer to?

you've been given all the necessary infromation

 

[wihosa]

If you want to see what a high rise building looks like when it is engulfed in flames then check out the fire in the Windsor Hotel in Madrid Spain, I think it was in 2010. The hotel is fully inflames, burns for almost 24 hrs and not surprisingly was still standing after it was put out. Not surprising because fire has never brought down a modern steel framed high rise building...EXCEPT on 911when it happened THREE TIMES!!!!

Now if you can believe that, I've got some land to sell you in Florida!

 

[Faun]

If you want to see what a high rise building looks like when it is engulfed in flames then check out the fire in the Windsor Hotel in Madrid Spain, I think it was in 2010. The hotel is fully inflames, burns for almost 24 hrs and not surprisingly was still standing after it was put out. Not surprising because fire has never brought down a modern steel framed high rise building...EXCEPT on 911when it happened THREE TIMES!!!!

Now if you can believe that, I've got some land to sell you in Florida!

Unlike WTC 7, which burned uncontrollably on some lower floors until they could no longer sustain the weight of the dozens of floors above them, the Windsor hotel fire broke out on the 21st floor of a building that was 29 floors above street level. And much of the top of the building did collapse. If there were dozens of floors above it, like in WTC 7, there would have been nothing to hold them up.

 

[SAYIT]

If you want to see what a high rise building looks like when it is engulfed in flames then check out the fire in the Windsor Hotel in Madrid Spain, I think it was in 2010. The hotel is fully inflames, burns for almost 24 hrs and not surprisingly was still standing after it was put out. Not surprising because fire has never brought down a modern steel framed high rise building...EXCEPT on 911when it happened THREE TIMES!!!!

Now if you can believe that, I've got some land to sell you in Florida!

Unlike WTC 7, which burned uncontrollably on some lower floors until they could no longer sustain the weight of the dozens of floors above them, the Windsor hotel fire broke out on the 21st floor of a building that was 29 floors above street level. And much of the top of the building did collapse. If there were dozens of floors above it, like in WTC 7, there would have been nothing to hold them up.

As you well know, most 9/11 CTs have absolutely no interest in applying facts and logic to their (Chia) pet CTs. Wilhosa has proven as resistant to 9/11 facts as to telling the truth. No wonder the 9/11 "Truther" Movement is dying ... all that's left is t-shirt and DVD hawkers and the losers who buy their wares.

 

[wihosa]

If you want to see what a high rise building looks like when it is engulfed in flames then check out the fire in the Windsor Hotel in Madrid Spain, I think it was in 2010. The hotel is fully inflames, burns for almost 24 hrs and not surprisingly was still standing after it was put out. Not surprising because fire has never brought down a modern steel framed high rise building...EXCEPT on 911when it happened THREE TIMES!!!!

Now if you can believe that, I've got some land to sell you in Florida!

Unlike WTC 7, which burned uncontrollably on some lower floors until they could no longer sustain the weight of the dozens of floors above them, the Windsor hotel fire broke out on the 21st floor of a building that was 29 floors above street level. And much of the top of the building did collapse. If there were dozens of floors above it, like in WTC 7, there would have been nothing to hold them up.

Really? And you base this conjecture on what?

So you look at the video of B7 and compare it to the Windsor Hotel and conclude that B7 is most likely to collapse? You're lying to yourself.

It doesn't matter how long B7 was on fire. The Official Conspiracy Theory says that for the first time ever fire caused the collapse of a modern steel framed high rise building. Not once but THREE TIMES.

Thousands and thousands of high rise building fires and for the first time it results in a collapse on 911, three times and never again since...

The OCT is full of holes.

 

[wihosa]

If you want to see what a high rise building looks like when it is engulfed in flames then check out the fire in the Windsor Hotel in Madrid Spain, I think it was in 2010. The hotel is fully inflames, burns for almost 24 hrs and not surprisingly was still standing after it was put out. Not surprising because fire has never brought down a modern steel framed high rise building...EXCEPT on 911when it happened THREE TIMES!!!!

Now if you can believe that, I've got some land to sell you in Florida!

Unlike WTC 7, which burned uncontrollably on some lower floors until they could no longer sustain the weight of the dozens of floors above them, the Windsor hotel fire broke out on the 21st floor of a building that was 29 floors above street level. And much of the top of the building did collapse. If there were dozens of floors above it, like in WTC 7, there would have been nothing to hold them up.

As you well know, most 9/11 CTs have absolutely no interest in applying facts and logic to their (Chia) pet CTs. Wilhosa has proven as resistant to 9/11 facts as to telling the truth. No wonder the 9/11 "Truther" Movement is dying ... all that's left is t-shirt and DVD hawkers and the losers who buy their wares.

Facts like no modern steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire except when it happened on 911. Thousands of high rise building fires and not until 911 when three collapse because of fire?

 

[SAYIT]

If you want to see what a high rise building looks like when it is engulfed in flames then check out the fire in the Windsor Hotel in Madrid Spain, I think it was in 2010. The hotel is fully inflames, burns for almost 24 hrs and not surprisingly was still standing after it was put out. Not surprising because fire has never brought down a modern steel framed high rise building...EXCEPT on 911when it happened THREE TIMES!!!!

Now if you can believe that, I've got some land to sell you in Florida!

Unlike WTC 7, which burned uncontrollably on some lower floors until they could no longer sustain the weight of the dozens of floors above them, the Windsor hotel fire broke out on the 21st floor of a building that was 29 floors above street level. And much of the top of the building did collapse. If there were dozens of floors above it, like in WTC 7, there would have been nothing to hold them up.

As you well know, most 9/11 CTs have absolutely no interest in applying facts and logic to their (Chia) pet CTs. Wilhosa has proven as resistant to 9/11 facts as to telling the truth. No wonder the 9/11 "Truther" Movement is dying ... all that's left is t-shirt and DVD hawkers and the losers who buy their wares.

Facts like no modern steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire except when it happened on 911. Thousands of high rise building fires and not until 911 when three collapse because of fire?

Well, no 100 story building was ever rammed by a modern passenger jet loaded with fuel at hundreds of mph (two were on 9/11) and none ever had large chunks of building fall on it from hundreds of feet in the air. Now we have instances of both and we know the result. Do you have a credible alternative?

 

[SAYIT]

If you want to see what a high rise building looks like when it is engulfed in flames then check out the fire in the Windsor Hotel in Madrid Spain, I think it was in 2010. The hotel is fully inflames, burns for almost 24 hrs and not surprisingly was still standing after it was put out. Not surprising because fire has never brought down a modern steel framed high rise building...EXCEPT on 911when it happened THREE TIMES!!!!

Now if you can believe that, I've got some land to sell you in Florida!

Unlike WTC 7, which burned uncontrollably on some lower floors until they could no longer sustain the weight of the dozens of floors above them, the Windsor hotel fire broke out on the 21st floor of a building that was 29 floors above street level. And much of the top of the building did collapse. If there were dozens of floors above it, like in WTC 7, there would have been nothing to hold them up.

Really? And you base this conjecture on what?

So you look at the video of B7 and compare it to the Windsor Hotel and conclude that B7 is most likely to collapse? You're lying to yourself.

It doesn't matter how long B7 was on fire. The Official Conspiracy Theory says that for the first time ever fire caused the collapse of a modern steel framed high rise building. Not once but THREE TIMES.

Thousands and thousands of high rise building fires and for the first time it results in a collapse on 911, three times and never again since...

The OCT is full of holes.

None of the "Truther" explanations come close to the official one for credibility or plausibility. Which of those CT fantasies is your personal fav?

 

[Faun]

If you want to see what a high rise building looks like when it is engulfed in flames then check out the fire in the Windsor Hotel in Madrid Spain, I think it was in 2010. The hotel is fully inflames, burns for almost 24 hrs and not surprisingly was still standing after it was put out. Not surprising because fire has never brought down a modern steel framed high rise building...EXCEPT on 911when it happened THREE TIMES!!!!

Now if you can believe that, I've got some land to sell you in Florida!

Unlike WTC 7, which burned uncontrollably on some lower floors until they could no longer sustain the weight of the dozens of floors above them, the Windsor hotel fire broke out on the 21st floor of a building that was 29 floors above street level. And much of the top of the building did collapse. If there were dozens of floors above it, like in WTC 7, there would have been nothing to hold them up.

Really? And you base this conjecture on what?

So you look at the video of B7 and compare it to the Windsor Hotel and conclude that B7 is most likely to collapse? You're lying to yourself.

It doesn't matter how long B7 was on fire. The Official Conspiracy Theory says that for the first time ever fire caused the collapse of a modern steel framed high rise building. Not once but THREE TIMES.

Thousands and thousands of high rise building fires and for the first time it results in a collapse on 911, three times and never again since...

The OCT is full of holes.

Many of the first responders to WTC7 believed the building was likely going to collapse. Were they lying to themselves? And you're under the misrepresentation that all fires are the same, but you're not comparing apples with apples. You're also comparing the collapse of WTC1 and WTC2 with WTC7 when they actually collapsed in different fashions. And you're comparing WTC7, which was a 47 story building that collapsed around the 13th floor with the Windsor Hotel, a 29 story (above ground) building which collapsed around the upper floors; as though they are the same. And as far as WTC1 and WTC2, they demonstrate that 100% of the skyscrapers which had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

 

[n0spam4me]

And as far as WTC1 and WTC2, they demonstrate that 100% of the skyscrapers which had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

so you are alleging that 100% of the time, flying an airplane into a skyscraper will cause the complete & total destruction of said skyscraper? .... what?

 

[Faun]

And as far as WTC1 and WTC2, they demonstrate that 100% of the skyscrapers which had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

so you are alleging that 100% of the time, flying an airplane into a skyscraper will cause the complete & total destruction of said skyscraper? .... what?

No, I am not alleging that. You truther nuts are delirious.

 

[n0spam4me]

truther nuts

Your attitude is showing ..... How about a real rebuttal?