Another Year And The Ones Who Were Involved In 911

[n0spam4me]

The fact still remains that in order to produce the observed result .... that is WTC7 North & West walls seen descending at 9.8 m/s^2 for 2.25 sec, the resistance would have needed to be removed all at the same time for the entire falling mass, Just exactly how is that accomplished without it being an engineered event?

false.
all that happened was the north face missed any impediments for that tiny amount of time.
it no proof of an engineered event..
try cause and effect

"tiny amount of time" now you are trying to minimize the time, when if fact it is rather significant
and also there is the fact that the North & West walls moved in unison. Just exactly how does that fit in with your explanation?

who's minimizing? no matter how you want to spin it 2.25 sec is negligible.
so they move in unison ?was something else supposed to happen?

So many tons of material fall in a manner that doesn't suggest, but rather confirms the fact that the falling body has no resistance under it and the fall lasts for 2.25 sec, and you are trying to make this insignificant?
The West & North walls of WTC7 are seen falling without deformation for 2.25 sec and in that time the vertical line formed by the corner of the North & West walls is seen to be

The fact still remains that in order to produce the observed result .... that is WTC7 North & West walls seen descending at 9.8 m/s^2 for 2.25 sec, the resistance would have needed to be removed all at the same time for the entire falling mass, Just exactly how is that accomplished without it being an engineered event?

false.
all that happened was the north face missed any impediments for that tiny amount of time.
it no proof of an engineered event..
try cause and effect

"tiny amount of time" now you are trying to minimize the time, when if fact it is rather significant
and also there is the fact that the North & West walls moved in unison. Just exactly how does that fit in with your explanation?

who's minimizing? no matter how you want to spin it 2.25 sec is negligible.
so they move in unison ?was something else supposed to happen?

So exactly how is it that ALL of the support under the North & West walls of WTC7 simply disappears and all at the same time?

all that need to happen (and did) was the supports that hold the north face be out of place just enough for it to slip by.
it all happening at the same time like you wish but have zero evidence to prove it is an optical illusion.
the 2.25 sec of "freefall" was only discovered when the tape was run at slower than normal speed at regular speed it not even noticeable.

Where do you get this stuff? The video run at 30fps and analyzed using standard software that is routinely used to analyze the speed of moving objects seen on video. The analysis confirms that the visible part of WTC7 that is seen dropping that is the North & West walls and anything connected to them, fell at 9.8 m/s^2 and did so for 2.25 sec.
So what you suggest is that the physical support for the falling mass would simply slip out-of-place and the whole thing came down as observed..... right? However, this does NOT account for all of the potential resistance to fall. There were stairwells, and elevator shafts and all sorts of things that communicated from ground level up to upper levels and would have presented resistance if not specifically removed.

BTW: have you seen this

 

[Skylar]

Where do you get this stuff? The video run at 30fps and analyzed using standard software that is routinely used to analyze the speed of moving objects seen on video. The analysis confirms that the visible part of WTC7 that is seen dropping that is the North & West walls and anything connected to them, fell at 9.8 m/s^2 and did so for 2.25 sec.
So what you suggest is that the physical support for the falling mass would simply slip out-of-place and the whole thing came down as observed..... right? However, this does NOT account for all of the potential resistance to fall.

We've been through this: there were no explosions, no bombs, no cut girders of any kind, despite your theory requiring thousands of each. The building was on fire, meaning any system of explosives would also have been on fire. And the fire would have melted almost everything, rendering the system unusable. The collapse of the building initiated in silence. And there's no such thing as silent explosives.

Your 'bombs' simply didn't exist. Nor can you show us any plausible scenario in which they could exist. Your explanation is an impossibility. Ending your entire conspiracy.[/quote]

 

[daws101]

false.
all that happened was the north face missed any impediments for that tiny amount of time.
it no proof of an engineered event..
try cause and effect

"tiny amount of time" now you are trying to minimize the time, when if fact it is rather significant
and also there is the fact that the North & West walls moved in unison. Just exactly how does that fit in with your explanation?

who's minimizing? no matter how you want to spin it 2.25 sec is negligible.
so they move in unison ?was something else supposed to happen?

So many tons of material fall in a manner that doesn't suggest, but rather confirms the fact that the falling body has no resistance under it and the fall lasts for 2.25 sec, and you are trying to make this insignificant?
The West & North walls of WTC7 are seen falling without deformation for 2.25 sec and in that time the vertical line formed by the corner of the North & West walls is seen to be

false.
all that happened was the north face missed any impediments for that tiny amount of time.
it no proof of an engineered event..
try cause and effect

"tiny amount of time" now you are trying to minimize the time, when if fact it is rather significant
and also there is the fact that the North & West walls moved in unison. Just exactly how does that fit in with your explanation?

who's minimizing? no matter how you want to spin it 2.25 sec is negligible.
so they move in unison ?was something else supposed to happen?

So exactly how is it that ALL of the support under the North & West walls of WTC7 simply disappears and all at the same time?

all that need to happen (and did) was the supports that hold the north face be out of place just enough for it to slip by.
it all happening at the same time like you wish but have zero evidence to prove it is an optical illusion.
the 2.25 sec of "freefall" was only discovered when the tape was run at slower than normal speed at regular speed it not even noticeable.

Where do you get this stuff? The video run at 30fps and analyzed using standard software that is routinely used to analyze the speed of moving objects seen on video. The analysis confirms that the visible part of WTC7 that is seen dropping that is the North & West walls and anything connected to them, fell at 9.8 m/s^2 and did so for 2.25 sec.
So what you suggest is that the physical support for the falling mass would simply slip out-of-place and the whole thing came down as observed..... right? However, this does NOT account for all of the potential resistance to fall. There were stairwells, and elevator shafts and all sorts of things that communicated from ground level up to upper levels and would have presented resistance if not specifically removed.

BTW: have you seen this

bullshit no architect would attach stair well and and elevators shafts to the outer walls of any building they must as per building and safety codes be self supporting and free standing.
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


here a normal speed compilation of the wtc 7 collapse please point out exactly where the "free fall" begin and ends
no truther bogus analysis videos please.














=

 

[daws101]

especially not this one it the classic slo mo you ass hats awaysl use as evidence.

The WTC 7 fires were on multiple floors, and were serious enough that the FDNY abandoned any efforts to control them: watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U Cause divining collapses by their acceleration is pure junk science, and the ~2.25 seconds at g occurred after most of the interior had already collapsed, so there was no pancaking to consider. The 100% moment-connected exterior simply buckled.

 

[n0spam4me]

"wtc 7 collapse please point out exactly where the "free fall" begin and ends"

See NIST NC STAR 1A page 46 ..... the graph lays it all out.

"no truther bogus analysis videos please."

Can you express exactly what is your objection to David Chandler's analysis ?

 

[daws101]

"wtc 7 collapse please point out exactly where the "free fall" begin and ends"

See NIST NC STAR 1A page 46 ..... the graph lays it all out.

"no truther bogus analysis videos please."

Can you express exactly what is your objection to David Chandler's analysis ?

that's not what i ASK YOU SPAMMY ...you are a coward.
david chandler is not an engineer he's a high school science teacher.

 

[n0spam4me]

"wtc 7 collapse please point out exactly where the "free fall" begin and ends"

See NIST NC STAR 1A page 46 ..... the graph lays it all out.

"no truther bogus analysis videos please."

Can you express exactly what is your objection to David Chandler's analysis ?

that's not what i ASK YOU SPAMMY ...you are a coward.
david chandler is not an engineer he's a high school science teacher.

This is all too common, complain about people's credentials,
Please note that anybody who did not sleep through middle school science can get this, its not rocket science!

Do you have any evidence to bring to this discussion that counters the argument for controlled demolition, and that is of all three, the towers & 7. All three steel framed skyscrapers were destroyed by controlled demolition.

 

[daws101]

"wtc 7 collapse please point out exactly where the "free fall" begin and ends"

See NIST NC STAR 1A page 46 ..... the graph lays it all out.

"no truther bogus analysis videos please."

Can you express exactly what is your objection to David Chandler's analysis ?

that's not what i ASK YOU SPAMMY ...you are a coward.
david chandler is not an engineer he's a high school science teacher.

This is all too common, complain about people's credentials,
Please note that anybody who did not sleep through middle school science can get this, its not rocket science!

Do you have any evidence to bring to this discussion that counters the argument for controlled demolition, and that is of all three, the towers & 7. All three steel framed skyscrapers were destroyed by controlled demolition.

no because that would be false there is no evidence for a CD. your augment for a CD is a specious fantasy.
besides it on you to prove your allegations .

 

[n0spam4me]

"wtc 7 collapse please point out exactly where the "free fall" begin and ends"

See NIST NC STAR 1A page 46 ..... the graph lays it all out.

"no truther bogus analysis videos please."

Can you express exactly what is your objection to David Chandler's analysis ?

that's not what i ASK YOU SPAMMY ...you are a coward.
david chandler is not an engineer he's a high school science teacher.

This is all too common, complain about people's credentials,
Please note that anybody who did not sleep through middle school science can get this, its not rocket science!

Do you have any evidence to bring to this discussion that counters the argument for controlled demolition, and that is of all three, the towers & 7. All three steel framed skyscrapers were destroyed by controlled demolition.

no because that would be false there is no evidence for a CD. your augment for a CD is a specious fantasy.
besides it on you to prove your allegations .

The descent rate of acceleration + the fact of complete & total destruction of the towers is compelling evidence that the towers & 7 were demolished intentionally.

 

[Skylar]

"wtc 7 collapse please point out exactly where the "free fall" begin and ends"

See NIST NC STAR 1A page 46 ..... the graph lays it all out.

"no truther bogus analysis videos please."

Can you express exactly what is your objection to David Chandler's analysis ?

And shocker, you ignore the impossibility of your own silly conspiracy. That's the thing with truthers: they don't question their own beliefs and they don't even think too hard about them. When obvious, ludicrously simple and utterly theory killing holes appear again and again in their conspiracy......they just ignore them and pretend they don't exist.

Exactly as you're doing now, Spammy.

Keep running.

 

[SAYIT]

"wtc 7 collapse please point out exactly where the "free fall" begin and ends"

See NIST NC STAR 1A page 46 ..... the graph lays it all out.

"no truther bogus analysis videos please."

Can you express exactly what is your objection to David Chandler's analysis ?

that's not what i ASK YOU SPAMMY ...you are a coward.
david chandler is not an engineer he's a high school science teacher.

This is all too common, complain about people's credentials,
Please note that anybody who did not sleep through middle school science can get this, its not rocket science!

Do you have any evidence to bring to this discussion that counters the argument for controlled demolition, and that is of all three, the towers & 7. All three steel framed skyscrapers were destroyed by controlled demolition.

Credentials are an important component of any discussion and in the case of 9/11 they are critical. That you whine like a stuck pig when caught embellishing those of your sources makes clear that you know they just aren't good enough to stand up to the credible experts who offer the most obvious 9/11 explanations. ... explanations you reject or ignore because they cause your CT "Truther" house of cards to crumble.

 

[n0spam4me]

"wtc 7 collapse please point out exactly where the "free fall" begin and ends"

See NIST NC STAR 1A page 46 ..... the graph lays it all out.

"no truther bogus analysis videos please."

Can you express exactly what is your objection to David Chandler's analysis ?

that's not what i ASK YOU SPAMMY ...you are a coward.
david chandler is not an engineer he's a high school science teacher.

This is all too common, complain about people's credentials,
Please note that anybody who did not sleep through middle school science can get this, its not rocket science!

Do you have any evidence to bring to this discussion that counters the argument for controlled demolition, and that is of all three, the towers & 7. All three steel framed skyscrapers were destroyed by controlled demolition.

Credentials are an important component of any discussion and in the case of 9/11 they are critical. That you whine like a stuck pig when caught embellishing those of your sources makes clear that you know they just aren't good enough to stand up to the credible experts who offer the most obvious 9/11 explanations. ... explanations you reject or ignore because they cause your CT "Truther" house of cards to crumble.

at what time have I ever attempted to embellish any credentials?
Bottom line here is that anybody who didn't sleep through middle school science can get this stuff.
also FACT, the alleged tests for explosives at ground zero were never DOCUMENTED so nobody
can say with any authority at all that there were no explosives used and as for the cut beams, there
are an abundance of pix of cut beams, however every time they are brought up, the opposition insists
that its a pix done after the clean-up operation had been in progress so its simply a product of the torch work
during the clean up process. lack of proper documentation leaves voids that are to be ignored by the faction
attempting to support the 19 suicidal hijackers story.

 

[Skylar]

Bottom line here is that anybody who didn't sleep through middle school science can get this stuff.

So use ' middle school science' to explain your 'silent explosives'. Remember, the collapse of the WTC 7 initiated in silence. Whereas actual controlled demolition is ludicrously loud. Use 'middle school science to explain how the buildings were destroyed via 'controlled demolition' without any bombs, without any cut girders, any residue of explosives, and while the system of explosives was on fire.

Explain how if there were the thousands and thousands of 'thermite reactions' you insist brought the building down, why none was ever seen? These reactions are so bright that they can damage your eyes if you look at them. They're used in fireworks. But every video, every witness, every angle of every moment of the tragedy just happened to miss thousands upon thousands of sun bright chemical reactions so powerful they could cut through 18 steel girders.....most of them on the OUTSIDE of each tower?

You can't explain any of it. Your theory not only makes no sense..its just stupid. And even you can't make it work.

 

[n0spam4me]

Bottom line here is that anybody who didn't sleep through middle school science can get this stuff.

So use ' middle school science' to explain your 'silent explosives'. Remember, the collapse of the WTC 7 initiated in silence. Whereas actual controlled demolition is ludicrously loud. Use 'middle school science to explain how the buildings were destroyed via 'controlled demolition' without any bombs, without any cut girders, any residue of explosives, and while the system of explosives was on fire.

Explain how if there were the thousands and thousands of 'thermite reactions' you insist brought the building down, why none was ever seen? These reactions are so bright that they can damage your eyes if you look at them. They're used in fireworks. But every video, every witness, every angle of every moment of the tragedy just happened to miss thousands upon thousands of sun bright chemical reactions so powerful they could cut through 18 steel girders.....most of them on the OUTSIDE of each tower?

You can't explain any of it. Your theory not only makes no sense..its just stupid. And even you can't make it work.

Lets get this straight about the audio track of the event, first of all, its all too easy to edit the audio track to any video, and as another fact here, the fall of WTC7 was far from silent and even if it was only the sound of the building "collapsing" there would be considerable noise. People heard explosions, and explosions were recorded on the audio track of videos being done that day and all the opposition can come up with is accusations that people are misinterpreting what they heard. however, there were explosive sounds both recorded and reported by witnesses.
The fact is that it would be ridiculously simple to stage theatrical fires close to the windows and still have the building rigged for controlled demolition. May I also point out that the explosives used in typical controlled demolitions are not the only explosives available, all sorts of different energetic materials are available and also choices as to how to implement the process, if the job could be done by one major explosion, but also be done by a number of smaller bits of explosive each doing part of the job and being smaller individual bits, not producing the outrageous blast you expect.
The fact that is the compelling evidence is that the towers & 7 came down at a rate, and in a manner that indicates clearly that the event was not the product of an aircraft crash + fire, but an engineered event that was helped along by some combination of Thermite &or C4 &or micro-nukes, hydrogen bomb, .... up to & including back magic! but the fact is the towers & 7 had a LOT of help to "collapse" as was observed.

 

[Skylar]

Lets get this straight about the audio track of the event, first of all, its all too easy to edit the audio track to any video, and as another fact here, the fall of WTC7 was far from silent and even if it was only the sound of the building "collapsing" there would be considerable noise.

Lets get this straight: the video I'm showing is yours. This is the video that YOU cited that you offered of the collapse. And now that it renders your conspiracy completely impossible......suddenly your own sources are unreliable?

Dude, you're raising denial to an art form.

Do you have the slightest evidence that the audio tracks were faked? Of course not. You're literally making this shit up as you go along and can't back any of it. The video evidence shows exactly the opposite of what you claimed. There are no explosions initiating the collapse. Here it is again:



Nothing. No explosions. A collapse that began so quietly that it didn't even interrupt the conversations of folks nearby. No explosions, no explosives. Here's *actual* controlled demolition with real explosives.:



Which is stupidly loud.

And when faced with yet another in a litany of obtuse, obvious contradictions between your failed conspiracy and reality........you cling to your conspiracy and ignore any evidence that contradicts you. Even when its your own video. Just like you ignored EVERY of the 43 videos of the impact of flight 175, insisting they were all faked, just as you ignored the FDNY and their assessment of heavy fire in the WTC 7 insisting instead that there were only 'theatrical fires', just as you ignored entire galleries of images of debris from the impacts, just as you ignored every black box that was recovered, every eye witness (which you dismiss as plants)....

You ignore anything that contradicts you. But why would a rational person ignore what you do? Your inability to answer this simple question is why your conspiracy keeps failing.

As there's absolutely no reason for us to ignore overlapping, overwhelming, compelling evidence for no other reason than it contradicts you.

 

[n0spam4me]

The funny thing here ( it would be totally funny if not for the fact that it is so tragic ) You see there is a 47 story skyscraper that simply drops at 9.8 m/s^2 for 2.25 sec and people are willing to buy the lame excuse that office fires + asymmetrical damage from stuff thrown by WTC1, 2 while they were "collapsing" caused this nice neat symmetrical descent with the building keeping its shape as it descends...... not only laws of physics people but probability, the odds are positively astronomical against any such thing happening just by chance, thus WTC7 had to have been an engineered demolition.

 

[Skylar]

The funny thing here ( it would be totally funny if not for the fact that it is so tragic )

What's funny is how desperate you are to avoid discussing the truck sized holes in your own claims. You've been reduced to ignoring your own sources, your own videos as fakes when they demonstrate your conspiracy is a physical impossibility.

No explosions, no explosives. As silent explosives don't exist. Your theory is already DOA.

Nor can you explain how any system of explosives could have operated while on fire. And the FDNY factually establishes massive, out of control fires in the WTC 7, spanning virtually every floor. And establishes the fires as the cause of the collapse....with the FDNY correctly predicting the collapse of WTC 7 by about an hour. You ignore them all.....but never could explain why.

You can't explain how the bombs wouldn't cut girders. You know the 'demolition' in controlled demolition? Your theory requires thousands and thousands of such cuts. Um, where are they?

You can't explain why there was no residue of explosives found in the dust samples taken from the WTC plaza.

Or why the Port authority bomb squad found no bombs only a week before 911. Or how their bomb sniffing dogs missed them.

Or why not a single charge was ever found, not before, during or after the collapse.

Or why no apparatus of explosives was ever found. Not an inch of blasting wire. Not a single receiver, transmitter, control board, anything.

Any one of which absolutely destroys your conspiracy. All together, they make it look as silly as it actually is. Face it....your conspiracy doesn't work.

 

[n0spam4me]

The funny thing here ( it would be totally funny if not for the fact that it is so tragic )

What's funny is how desperate you are to avoid discussing the truck sized holes in your own claims. You've been reduced to ignoring your own sources, your own videos as fakes when they demonstrate your conspiracy is a physical impossibility.

No explosions, no explosives. As silent explosives don't exist. Your theory is already DOA.

Nor can you explain how any system of explosives could have operated while on fire. And the FDNY factually establishes massive, out of control fires in the WTC 7, spanning virtually every floor. And establishes the fires as the cause of the collapse....with the FDNY correctly predicting the collapse of WTC 7 by about an hour. You ignore them all.....but never could explain why.

You can't explain how the bombs wouldn't cut girders. You know the 'demolition' in controlled demolition? Your theory requires thousands and thousands of such cuts. Um, where are they?

You can't explain why there was no residue of explosives found in the dust samples taken from the WTC plaza.

Or why the Port authority bomb squad found no bombs only a week before 911. Or how their bomb sniffing dogs missed them.

Or why not a single charge was ever found, not before, during or after the collapse.

Or why no apparatus of explosives was ever found. Not an inch of blasting wire. Not a single receiver, transmitter, control board, anything.

Any one of which absolutely destroys your conspiracy. All together, they make it look as silly as it actually is. Face it....your conspiracy doesn't work.

In the bit about finding detonator bits, the rubble was given a fine-toothed-comb treatment and in that, if something turned up that was a small piece of PC board and the workers could not classify it as a piece of something, it would just be relegated to the unknown pile, it may have been a bit of somebodies transistor radio, or a piece of a computer, and with bits that are so small, its impossible to define exactly what it was, so ya, bits could have been in the wreckage and simply not identified as pieces of detonators.

Please note YOUR theory requires many thousands of cuts, I am keeping an open mind as to exactly how it was done, however we all can see the result of the operation in the destruction of WTC1, 2 & 7.

"You can't explain why there was no residue of explosives found in the dust samples taken from the WTC plaza."
stalemate, you can't produce the document that proves any such tests were ever done.

have you seen this:

 

[Skylar]

In the bit about finding detonator bits, the rubble was given a fine-toothed-comb treatment and in that, if something turned up that was a small piece of PC board and the workers could not classify it as a piece of something, it would just be relegated to the unknown pile, it may have been a bit of somebodies transistor radio, or a piece of a computer, and with bits that are so small, its impossible to define exactly what it was, so ya, bits could have been in the wreckage and simply not identified as pieces of detonators.

If PC boards were the only apparatus of explosives, you might have a point. But they aren't. There was no det cord, no blasting wire, no charges, no nothing. There was absolutely nothing one would expect to find in the aftermath of controlled demolition. No girders cut in a manner consistent with controlled demolition. With considerable debris landing outside the perimeter of the building.....and showing absolutely no signs of controlled demolition.

There is exactly nothing backing any part of your story.

As for thermate....show us, don't tell us. Your theory requires tens of thousands of thermate reactions. Show us. Remember, more than 80% of load bearing girders for the WTC 1 and 2 were on the outside of the building, exposed to open air. Thermate is insanely bright, capable of damaging your eyes if you look at it. They use it in fireworks.

Its impossible to miss. And per your theory, occurred by the tens of thousands of such reactions. Most of them on the outside of the building. So, um..... where were they?

You can't show us any thermite reactions. Not during the collapse, not after. Not before. There are exactly zero thermite reactions ever seen. Its almost like your entire theory is imaginary nonsense.

 

[n0spam4me]

"No girders cut in a manner consistent with controlled demolition" Oh yea and the moment I point to a picture that includes obviously cut steel, the comment is made that the pix must have been taken after the clean up operation was in progress and that was torch cut steel as a product of the clean-up operation. oh well .....

also "det cord" and other bits are only relevant if a conventional Controlled Demolition is being done, however using radio controlled detonators, this eliminates the need for det cord...... There are devices that use thermite and are self consuming packages such that once the demolition is done, there is nothing left.

again, YOUR version of the controlled demolition is not the ONLY possibility, there are a multitude of different ways it could have been done. Speculation about HOW it was done is futile when nobody can even agree upon what was done.