Fire Protection Engineer: 9/11 BOMBSHELL INTERVIEW

[Gamolon]

I don't hear the audible noise.

I didn't either.

Making shit up Mr. Jones?

 

[Gamolon]

Why has there been NO global collapse of ANY steel hi rise building that produced free fall speeds, despite more intense fires...IN HISTORY??

I'll make this REAL easy for you.

You have posted evidence of the following.

Buildings that suffered intense fires that didn't suffer ANY collapse and buildings that suffered partial collapse.

How do you explain how one building partially collapsed and one didn't? They had steel structures right?

 

[Patriot911]

Why has there been NO global collapse of ANY steel hi rise building that produced free fall speeds, despite more intense fires...IN HISTORY??

I'll make this REAL easy for you.

You have posted evidence of the following.

Buildings that suffered intense fires that didn't suffer ANY collapse and buildings that suffered partial collapse.

How do you explain how one building partially collapsed and one didn't? They had steel structures right?

No, no, no, no Gamolon! It has to collapse EXACTLY like WTC 7! It has to be a complete collapse! It has to have 2.25 seconds of freefall! ALL BUILDINGS HAVE TO REACT THE EXACT SAME WAY REGARDLESS OF CONSTRUCTION, MATERIAL, OR CIRCUMSTANCES OR ELSE THERE IS A CONSPIRACY WE NEED TO SPEND HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON BECAUSE EVERYTHING HAS TO BE WRONG!!!!!!! *pant* *pant* *pant*.

Sorry. Was channeling a truthtard named Jones there for a second. Now I feel dirty! Need to go take another shower.

 

[Gamolon]

Does anyone else hear that audible noise preceding the total straight down collapse, that produced 2.25 secs. of free fall, in this video??
So why didn't the rigid part of this building resist falling down?
There weren't fires on all the floors...
How could the collapse produce 2.25 secs. of free fall speed?
Why did NIST not calculate this after so many years of time and money at their disposal?
Why did it take a high school physics teacher to FORCE NIST to abruptly change their theory?
Why did the 9-11 commission report writers change their stance on the investigation?
Why are you so hell bent on being an anti American troll?
Why has there been NO global collapse of ANY steel hi rise building that produced free fall speeds, despite more intense fires...IN HISTORY??

Where was the noise when the penthouse collapsed?

Look at the video again and
Turn you speakers up, there is a clear audible BOOM preceding the
entire collapse!

Wait a minute.

Why didn't the free fall start then? If that BOOM you hear was the explosives, that means all the supports were cut at that point? Why didn't the global collapse at the same time the east penthouse collapsed? Why did it happen in stages? Why did the free fall wait several seconds before occurring? Why was there no BOOM when the perimeter facade collapsed?

Let me guess...

WTC7 was constructed like a "muffler"?

WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

[Gamolon]

Why has there been NO global collapse of ANY steel hi rise building that produced free fall speeds, despite more intense fires...IN HISTORY??

I'll make this REAL easy for you.

You have posted evidence of the following.

Buildings that suffered intense fires that didn't suffer ANY collapse and buildings that suffered partial collapse.

How do you explain how one building partially collapsed and one didn't? They had steel structures right?

No, no, no, no Gamolon! It has to collapse EXACTLY like WTC 7! It has to be a complete collapse! It has to have 2.25 seconds of freefall! ALL BUILDINGS HAVE TO REACT THE EXACT SAME WAY REGARDLESS OF CONSTRUCTION, MATERIAL, OR CIRCUMSTANCES OR ELSE THERE IS A CONSPIRACY WE NEED TO SPEND HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON BECAUSE EVERYTHING HAS TO BE WRONG!!!!!!! *pant* *pant* *pant*.

Sorry. Was channeling a truthtard named Jones there for a second. Now I feel dirty! Need to go take another shower.

Don't ever do that again.

You scared me...

 

[Mr. Jones]

Where was the noise when the penthouse collapsed?

Look at the video again and
Turn you speakers up, there is a clear audible BOOM preceding the
entire collapse!

Wait a minute.

Why didn't the free fall start then? If that BOOM you hear was the explosives, that means all the supports were cut at that point? Why didn't the global collapse at the same time the east penthouse collapsed? Why did it happen in stages? Why did the free fall wait several seconds before occurring? Why was there no BOOM when the perimeter facade collapsed?

Let me guess...

WTC7 was constructed like a "muffler"?

WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Why did free fall even occur? How do you remove all the resistance and components to allow it to happen...in an office fire..that wasn't hit by a plane.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Nope never hit by a plane, just had a 110 story building fall on it....

 

[eots]

Nope never hit by a plane, just had a 110 story building fall on it....

Why ya gotta lie like that ollie ? ...peices of debris from a 100 story building damged it...why do you feel the need to pretend it was an entire building ?...and why do you still pretend NIST determined it was not significant to the collapse

 

[Mr. Jones]

Nope never hit by a plane, just had a 110 story building fall on it....

Why ya gotta lie like that ollie ? ...peices of debris from a 100 story building damged it...why do you feel the need to pretend it was an entire building ?...and why do you still pretend NIST determined it was not significant to the collapse

Lol, talk about exaggerations, damn WTC 4,5,6 had more debris on them and they DID NOT COLLAPSE!
Face it NIST lied to you, to everybody, criminals have the country by the balls. Connect the dots man, this shit could have been stopped, but information was stonewalled, Bush demanded the FBI leave things alone...there is so much that points to corrupt government complicity, it isn't funny, and folks like you-ex military and all, why do you cover for these motherfuckers?

 

[Patriot911]

Nope never hit by a plane, just had a 110 story building fall on it....

Why ya gotta lie like that ollie ? ...peices of debris from a 100 story building damged it...why do you feel the need to pretend it was an entire building ?...and why do you still pretend NIST determined it was not significant to the collapse

Lol, talk about exaggerations, damn WTC 4,5,6 had more debris on them and they DID NOT COLLAPSE!

Yes, we know you're a fucking retard and believe every building should react the exact same way regardless of construction, materials and circumstances, but intelligent people understand that tall buildings have a much greater probability of collapse that short, squat buildings. But hey. Keep up the lies! It proves to anyone reading your bullshit just how dilusional and stupid you really are.

Face it NIST lied to you, to everybody, criminals have the country by the balls. Connect the dots man, this shit could have been stopped, but information was stonewalled, Bush demanded the FBI leave things alone...there is so much that points to corrupt government complicity, it isn't funny, and folks like you-ex military and all, why do you cover for these motherfuckers?

More bullshit lies from the kind of bullshit. So I am sure you can prove that Bush stopped FBI investigations, right? Oh wait! It was the FBI that did the investigation! If the FBI wasn't complicit in the conspiracy, they would have uncovered the conspiracy! Better yet, Bush is no longer in power which means any orders he might have given would be null and void and open for exposure! I guess someone with the intellectual might of a mental midget like you would have thought this through a little better. Apparently not!

 

[eots]

why ya gotta lie like that ollie ? ...peices of debris from a 100 story building damged it...why do you feel the need to pretend it was an entire building ?...and why do you still pretend nist determined it was not significant to the collapse

lol, talk about exaggerations, damn wtc 4,5,6 had more debris on them and they did not collapse!

yes, we know you're a fucking retard and believe every building should react the exact same way regardless of construction, materials and circumstances, but intelligent people understand that tall buildings have a much greater probability of collapse that short, squat buildings. But hey. Keep up the lies! It proves to anyone reading your bullshit just how dilusional and stupid you really are.

your ramble is pointless as nist determined damage was not significant in the collapse...why do you keep running from that fact

 

[eots]

the quality of debwunkers has hit an all time low of late..

 

[Patriot911]

lol, talk about exaggerations, damn wtc 4,5,6 had more debris on them and they did not collapse!

yes, we know you're a fucking retard and believe every building should react the exact same way regardless of construction, materials and circumstances, but intelligent people understand that tall buildings have a much greater probability of collapse that short, squat buildings. But hey. Keep up the lies! It proves to anyone reading your bullshit just how dilusional and stupid you really are.

your ramble is pointless as nist determined damage was not significant in the collapse...why do you keep running from that fact

The only one claiming I am running from that fact is your sorry ass. And, as usual, you fucked up. I am not talking about the damage suffered by WTC 7.

Try to follow along, junior, while you get schooled once again by your betters.

According to you dumbfuck losers, all buildings should react the same regardless of construction, materials or circumstances. So let's compare two buildings that at least had some things in common; the Empire State Building and the Twin Towers.

All three had airplanes fly into them.

All three suffered damage.

Two collapsed.

One didn't.

The FACT that the Empire State Building was primarily reinforced concrete instead of steel frame made a difference in the end results.

The FACT that the Empire State Building had supports throughout the floor instead of just the core and outside wall made a difference in the end results.

The FACT that the fire in the Empire State Building was minor and quickly put out (40 minutes) made a difference in the end results.

The FACT that the fire in the Empire State Building didn't cover several acres of area made a difference in the end result.

The FACT that the Empire State Building had a lot less weight above the impact point to support made a difference in the end result.

Are you starting to catch a clue yet or do you need a monkey with slightly more intelligence than you to explain it to you?

And to answer Jones' question of why didn't 4, 5 and 6 collapse, they were all much shorter structures without the weight issues a sky scraper contends with. Again, he tries (and fails) to compare apples to nails and comes out looking like a fool.

 

[eots]

your ramble is pointless as nist determined damage was not significant in the collapse...why do you keep running from that fact

The only one claiming I am running from that fact is your sorry ass. And, as usual, you fucked up. I am not talking about the damage suffered by WTC 7.

Try to follow along, junior, while you get schooled once again by your betters.

According to you dumbfuck losers, all buildings should react the same regardless of construction, materials or circumstances. So let's compare two buildings that at least had some things in common; the Empire State Building and the Twin Towers.

All three had airplanes fly into them.

All three suffered damage.

Two collapsed.

One didn't.

The FACT that the Empire State Building was primarily reinforced concrete instead of steel frame made a difference in the end results.

The FACT that the Empire State Building had supports throughout the floor instead of just the core and outside wall made a difference in the end results.

The FACT that the fire in the Empire State Building was minor and quickly put out (40 minutes) made a difference in the end results.

The FACT that the fire in the Empire State Building didn't cover several acres of area made a difference in the end result.

The FACT that the Empire State Building had a lot less weight above the impact point to support made a difference in the end result.

Are you starting to catch a clue yet or do you need a monkey with slightly more intelligence than you to explain it to you?

And to answer Jones' question of why didn't 4, 5 and 6 collapse, they were all much shorter structures without the weight issues a sky scraper contends with. Again, he tries (and fails) to compare apples to nails and comes out looking like a fool.

THEY DID NOT COLLAPSE COMPLETELY AND SYMMETRICALLY BECAUSE NO EXPLOSIVES WERE USED

 

[Patriot911]

The only one claiming I am running from that fact is your sorry ass. And, as usual, you fucked up. I am not talking about the damage suffered by WTC 7.

Try to follow along, junior, while you get schooled once again by your betters.

According to you dumbfuck losers, all buildings should react the same regardless of construction, materials or circumstances. So let's compare two buildings that at least had some things in common; the Empire State Building and the Twin Towers.

All three had airplanes fly into them.

All three suffered damage.

Two collapsed.

One didn't.

The FACT that the Empire State Building was primarily reinforced concrete instead of steel frame made a difference in the end results.

The FACT that the Empire State Building had supports throughout the floor instead of just the core and outside wall made a difference in the end results.

The FACT that the fire in the Empire State Building was minor and quickly put out (40 minutes) made a difference in the end results.

The FACT that the fire in the Empire State Building didn't cover several acres of area made a difference in the end result.

The FACT that the Empire State Building had a lot less weight above the impact point to support made a difference in the end result.

Are you starting to catch a clue yet or do you need a monkey with slightly more intelligence than you to explain it to you?

And to answer Jones' question of why didn't 4, 5 and 6 collapse, they were all much shorter structures without the weight issues a sky scraper contends with. Again, he tries (and fails) to compare apples to nails and comes out looking like a fool.

THEY DID NOT COLLAPSE COMPLETELY AND SYMMETRICALLY BECAUSE NO EXPLOSIVES WERE USED

Did you have an aneurism or is this just a mental meltdown? Kind of hard to imagine a mental midget like yourself having something called a "mental" meltdown, but stranger things have happened.

So what evidence do you have to present that proves explosives HAVE to be involved in a complete, symmetrical collapse? Remember your lameass opinion is not evidence. It is just a lameassed opinion. Now run along, junior.

 

[eots]

THEY DID NOT COLLAPSE COMPLETELY AND SYMMETRICALLY BECAUSE NO EXPLOSIVES WERE USED

Did you have an aneurism or is this just a mental meltdown? Kind of hard to imagine a mental midget like yourself having something called a "mental" meltdown, but stranger things have happened.

So what evidence do you have to present that proves explosives HAVE to be involved in a complete, symmetrical collapse? Remember your lameass opinion is not evidence. It is just a lameassed opinion. Now run along, junior.

yes indeed candyfag 2 ...a symmetrical and complete collapse of a steel hi-rise building can only be achieved through a controlled demolition

 

[eots]

show me were a steel framed hi-rise has ever collapse symmetrically and completely in the history of steel frame hi -rise buildings

 

[Patriot911]

show me were a steel framed hi-rise has ever collapse symmetrically and completely in the history of steel frame hi -rise buildings

Not having a prior example of something is NOT evidence you are correct that it HAS to be done via explosives. It is only an example of your very simplistic thinking and rather ignorant outlook on reality.

 

[eots]

show me were a steel framed hi-rise has ever collapse symmetrically and completely in the history of steel frame hi -rise buildings

Not having a prior example of something is NOT evidence you are correct that it HAS to be done via explosives. It is only an example of your very simplistic thinking and rather ignorant outlook on reality.

so your answer is you can not provide a single one...I see

 

[Patriot911]

show me were a steel framed hi-rise has ever collapse symmetrically and completely in the history of steel frame hi -rise buildings

Not having a prior example of something is NOT evidence you are correct that it HAS to be done via explosives. It is only an example of your very simplistic thinking and rather ignorant outlook on reality.

so your answer is you can not provide a single one...I see

And neither can you. Yet you can't see that. Nobody is as blind as one blind by their own ignorance. Could the towers and WTC 7 be taken down by controlled demolition? Sure! But there is no such thing as the perfect crime, and this particular crime would leave so much evidence it wouldn't even be funny! Yet not one scrap, not one iota of evidence has ever been found. Don't even bother with Jones and company's bullshit claims. Dust they had to process the hell out of before they could get it to spark and then it sparked at the wrong temperature for a thermite reaction of any kind so they just called it an "active thermitic substance" isn't evidence other than of the extreme gullibility of truthtards. A matchhead is an "active thermitic substance".

So the difference between us is that I can see all possibilities, but you can only see one. I go off the evidence, you go off your hopes and dreams. I use common sense, logic and science, you go off bullshit and lies. There is a huge difference between us, eots. You're a piece of shit and I'm not.