"Building What": Geraldo At Large

Discussion in 'Conspiracy Theories' started by georgephillip, Dec 8, 2010.

  1. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    From Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:

    "On November 13, Bob McIlvaine and Tony Szamboti appeared on Geraldo Rivera's show "Geraldo At Large" on Fox News to talk about the 'BuildingWhat?' TV ad campaign and World Trade Center Building 7 for a short segment.

    "Bob McIlvaine lost his son Bobby McIlvaine on September 11, 2001. He is an active member of NYC CAN, a group that co-sponsors the 'BuildingWhat?' TV ad campaign.

    "Tony Szamboti is a mechanical engineer and signer of the petition at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a group of more than 1,350 professionals calling for a new independent investigation into the destruction of Building 7 and the twin towers."

    For those who are interested (unafraid?) of an independent investigation into the collapse of "Building What", aka, WTC7 there may never be a better time to educate Americans about how many skyscrapers fell on 9/11/2001.
     
  2. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Geraldo is still alive?
     
  3. Patriot911
    Offline

    Patriot911 BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,184
    Thanks Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Ratings:
    +91
    My question is what will all the truthtards do if they ever get their "independant investigation" and it comes to the exact same conclusion as the investigation that has already been done. We all know the answer. If the "investigation" doesn't tell them exactly what they want to hear, they will ignore it like they ignore all the rest of the evidence they don't like. In other words, a new investigation is a waste of time and money. The truthtards won't like the outcome and everyone else won't be surprised by the outcome.

    Regardless, truthtards are lacking the one thing they really need to get a new investigation. Evidence. They have zero evidence the original investigation was fundamentally flawed.
     
  4. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    In spite of the government's successful policy of destroying much of the evidence through "cleaning up" the crime scene, there's no shortage of scientific proof WTC7 did not collapse from scattered fires and debris.

    Some are simply afraid to look...

    Evidence Destroyed is...
     
  5. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    That's the rumor.

    The question in my mind is...has he earned so much money he no longer cares about anything resembling the truth.

    Stay tuned.
     
  6. Patriot911
    Offline

    Patriot911 BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,184
    Thanks Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Ratings:
    +91
    ae911truth uses junk science, a lot of flawed opinion, and outright lies to make their case. A shame they fool gullible people like you into believing their bullshit. How does it feel to be led around by the short and curlies by people who's only goal is to milk you of as much money as possible?
     
  7. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    Are you an architect or engineer?

    Do you have any links to support your claims?
     
  8. Patriot911
    Offline

    Patriot911 BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,184
    Thanks Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Ratings:
    +91
    Nope. But the one engineer I DO have trumps all your wannabes. Leslie Robertson, the lead engineer for the twin towers, understands what happened far better than a bunch of truthtards sitting around trying to figure out how they can make a living bilking gullible people like you out of your money.

    I know plenty of architects. Architects have some understanding of engineering, but not to the degree necessary to make the kind of bullshit claims constantly being made at ae911. Richard Gage is a dumbfuck who couldn't make it in the real world so now he makes his money telling truthtards what they want to hear.

    As for links, that is too general just in claiming ae911 is a bunch of fucked up whiners out to make a buck or two. Hell, just look at all the donate buttons they have on every page. They couldn't be happier separating you sheep from your wool.

    State your case and I will debunk it complete with links to back up my claims.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. PhysicsExist
    Offline

    PhysicsExist Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2010
    Messages:
    661
    Thanks Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +18
    First of all sir, I'd like to point out that it's quite obvious you have an Anti-911truth agenda. It is clear, and most obvious when it comes to your registrar name and the date you joined, but that is just my opinion.

    To continue, I'm going to take you up on your claim.

    Let's start it off simple.

    1) WTC7 Fell in Freefall for around 2-3 seconds (as admitted by NIST, and proven by video evidence.)

    My question is: How does a building fall through the path of Greatest Resistance? If building 7 freefell into its own footprint, it needed to have the least resistance directly under it. Where did all the support beams and columns on every floor go? The ONLY way for it to fall this way is if there is nothing under it, according to Newtonian Physics.

    2) Office fires burn at 1200-1400 Degrees, even as high as 1800 according to NIST. If this is the case, how does it melt steel in WTC7? You need 2400-2800 F degrees to even start melting steel, (especially with fireproofing) 1000 degrees off is a HUGE problem. You cannot tell me water freezes at 40 degrees F or 100 degrees F, therefore you cannot say steel is melted by office fires. Basic science.

    3) Regarding the Twin Towers, simple question:

    How does a building with Asymmetrical damage (from the plane) collapse with Symmetrical damage? and 2nd part to this question is, how does the collapsing Twin Tower accelerate during initiation? Where is the 'jolt'?

    Newton's basic laws of physics were violated in all 3 WTC collapses.

    And just a reminder 'Patriot911', do not distract from these points; instead debunk them with physics and facts, and show me your opinion and sources. It is impossible to refute these basic points, so I can only expect your 'agenda' to try and detour from the discussion at hand. Rebuttal my points.

    PS. You joined recently, are you a Disinfoagent? Just wondering.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2010
  10. Patriot911
    Offline

    Patriot911 BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,184
    Thanks Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    Ratings:
    +91
    No shit, Sherlock! Did it take you all day to come to that conclusion or did someone have to point it out to you? Nice that I am your first post on a fresh account. My guess is you followed me from somewhere. :lol:

    First off, it didn't fall into it's own footprint. If it did, no other building around it would be damaged. It did, however, fall straight down.

    If you had ever read the NIST report, you would know that the collapse initiated inside the building before it was ever really visible on the outside. Thus the support structures were already compromized. It isn't hard to imagine there would be a 2-3 second span of time where the resistance just wasn't there.

    A controlled demolition is just a collapse initiated with explosives. From there, gravity does all the work. If it can be done in a controlled demoltion, it can also happen if the collapse is initiated by other means such as fire.

    Only truthtards believe the steel actually melted. Steel loses half it's strength at just over 1000F, well within the range of office fires. That is why they put flame retardant on the beams; to keep them from warping or failing due to a normal office fire. Do you really think a beam has to completely melt before it fails? :lol:

    Simple. The collapse of the south tower where you had the most obvious asymmetrical damage was not a symmetrical collapse at the start. Watch any of the videos and you will see the entire upper structure starting to rotate before the stress on the supporting structures was too great and they too failed, bringing the entire structure down in what you call a "collapse with symmetrical damage".

    It is called gravity. Gravity tries to accelerate everything at 32 feet per second per second. That is called free fall. For there to be a "jolt", you would need enough resistance to completely arrest the entire upper structure of either tower. Neither tower's structures were designed to handle anywhere near the dynamic load of the entire upper structure moving down and colliding with them. Thus you had near instantanious failure. Did it slow down the collapse? Yes. The towers didn't fall at free fall acceleration speeds. We know this because we can clearly see debris being pushed over the edge of the collapse event and debris beating the collapse event to the ground. As Galileo proved at the leaning tower of Pisa, two objects of differing mass will fall at the same rate of speed.

    No they didn't. You can't violate the laws of physics without rewriting the laws of physics. What you are rather lamely pretending is that explosives can somehow make the laws of physics seem to be broken, yet you have not explained exactly how this is done. Instead you are parroting all the conspiratard sites that pretend to know physics, but are really just out to bilk simpletons such as yourself out of your money through donations by telling you what you want to hear.

    I believe I did. Go ahead and respond to them.

    Coming from someone with exactly one post (this one), you don't have room to talk. Actually I stated why I came over here. Some truthtards claimed I was someone else over here so I came over here to prove I wasn't. :lol: Oh well. The truthtards at the other site were getting tired of constantly being beat up by the truth.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page