Flight 93 crash fantasy

[PhysicsExist]

Anyone?

Anyone what? Are you asking if anyone will come to your defense and agree with you?

It didn't work in the concrete core thread, why would you think it would work here, Chris?

Chris ? concrete core ? wtf are you on boy ?

they are so fucking delusional I cannot even fathom it. They assume I'm Chris, and then ignore the facts and issues presented. Its embarrassing, this forum cannot have this many naive people, its so humbling to acknowledge that people will fight against the truth this way. How do you disregard the physics of earth? How can you avoid the points of freefall? How can you not realize that it is i-m-p-o-s-s-i-b-l-e?

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP0Hs-v-uJ0[/ame]

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Christophera and PhysicsExist have their own cartoon show.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEAYcR8w_tE&feature=related[/ame]

It fits in with their cartoonish theories.

It must be a Santa Barbara thing.

 

[eots]

Christophera and PhysicsExist have their own cartoon show.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEAYcR8w_tE&feature=related

It fits in with their cartoonish theories.

It must be a Santa Barbara thing.

stop projecting your homo erotic fantasies on the rest of is loser

 

[HUGGY]

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

Anyone?

Take a deep breath there sparky! Oh and your sig is too big..tidy it up and remove the stupid quotes... The people you are aguing with are not on this thread to learn anything. They received thier marching orders 9 years ago. The good news is that eventually everything on the internet will able to be traced back to a specific account and computer which everyone will have access to. Don't be too shocked when many of those that proffesionaly poo poo 9/11 questions are discovered to be non existant accounts in goverment buildings.

#7 I have saved for last because it is the least talked about event of that day. I would be willing to bet that 90 percent of the population doesn't even know the circumstance of building 7 and the ones that have heard of it assume that the towers fell on it or some other crap they picked up that was spread around to confuse any questions.

#7 defies any logic whatsoever. The disinformation people have not come up with ANY reasonable scenerio. They have just ignored it because there is no airplane or muslim to blame it on. It didn't happen at a supposed secure property like the pentagon where there was no public access. It didn't happen way out in the woods where it could be cordoned off and the scene could be anything someone wanted it to be.

Yes number 7.... Not tall enough to blame fire..It is not difficult to fight a fire in a ten story building. It makes an interesting problem for those that must include it in the overall cover up. This is the one where rationality completely goes south and they go straight to wacko conspiracy theoriests. They do not question that a ten story building just falls down. That is because there is NO rational excuse for it.

If this had happened anywhere else but a couple of blocks from the towers it would be one of the most talked about mysteries of all time. No...It is one of the least talked about mysteries of all time. Odd.

 

[HUGGY]

Oh ya...where are the #7 victims? These people do like to hide behind the victims? There should be plenty of survivors from #7. It doesn't take very long to evacuate a building that size. There should be hundreds of witnesses.

 

[PhysicsExist]

Anyone what? Are you asking if anyone will come to your defense and agree with you?

It didn't work in the concrete core thread, why would you think it would work here, Chris?

Chris ? concrete core ? wtf are you on boy ?

they are so fucking delusional I cannot even fathom it. They assume I'm Chris, and then ignore the facts and issues presented. Its embarrassing, this forum cannot have this many naive people, its so humbling to acknowledge that people will fight against the truth this way. How do you disregard the physics of earth? How can you avoid the points of freefall? How can you not realize that it is i-m-p-o-s-s-i-b-l-e?

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP0Hs-v-uJ0[/ame]

 

[SFC Ollie]

This is consistent with early reports of "a couple of floors burning"[10]. By the time the order was given to evacuate the area, Chief of Department Daniel Nigro says that there was "very heavy fire on many floors"[11]. By half-an-hour before the collapse, the building is described as "fully involved in flames":

Just when you thought it was over, you’re walking by this building and you’re hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames ... Sure enough, about half an hour later it came down. (Lieutenant James McGlynn


Then we received an order from Fellini, we're going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn't look good. ... Then this other officer I'm standing next to said, that building doesn't look straight. So I'm standing there. I'm looking at the building. It didn't look right, but, well, we'll go in, we'll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies [sic: this should probably be "Brandeis"] came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. (Fire Captain Chris Boyle


The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the façade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. (Fire Chief Frank Fellini


We were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse. (Deputy Chief Peter Hayden

WTC7 - SkepticWiki

 

[DiveCon]

1) Building 7 came down in a sudden collapse, across the full length of the building, for full freefall acceleration for 105 feet, or 8 floors.

2) The freefall for 2.25 seconds is impossible because in a natural collapse a building would need its columns to buckle/fail

3) When columns buckle/fail, there is a MINIMUM resistance, its asymptotic (it never gives a zero) thus meaning this is IMPOSSIBLE for freefall to occur.

Anyone?

Take a deep breath there sparky! Oh and your sig is too big..tidy it up and remove the stupid quotes... The people you are aguing with are not on this thread to learn anything. They received thier marching orders 9 years ago. The good news is that eventually everything on the internet will able to be traced back to a specific account and computer which everyone will have access to. Don't be too shocked when many of those that proffesionaly poo poo 9/11 questions are discovered to be non existant accounts in goverment buildings.

#7 I have saved for last because it is the least talked about event of that day. I would be willing to bet that 90 percent of the population doesn't even know the circumstance of building 7 and the ones that have heard of it assume that the towers fell on it or some other crap they picked up that was spread around to confuse any questions.

#7 defies any logic whatsoever. The disinformation people have not come up with ANY reasonable scenerio. They have just ignored it because there is no airplane or muslim to blame it on. It didn't happen at a supposed secure property like the pentagon where there was no public access. It didn't happen way out in the woods where it could be cordoned off and the scene could be anything someone wanted it to be.

Yes number 7.... Not tall enough to blame fire..It is not difficult to fight a fire in a ten story building. It makes an interesting problem for those that must include it in the overall cover up. This is the one where rationality completely goes south and they go straight to wacko conspiracy theoriests. They do not question that a ten story building just falls down. That is because there is NO rational excuse for it.

If this had happened anywhere else but a couple of blocks from the towers it would be one of the most talked about mysteries of all time. No...It is one of the least talked about mysteries of all time. Odd.

uh, huggy, WTC7 was a 47 story building
one that had been evacuated HOURS before it collapsed

 

[HUGGY]

Anyone?

Take a deep breath there sparky! Oh and your sig is too big..tidy it up and remove the stupid quotes... The people you are aguing with are not on this thread to learn anything. They received thier marching orders 9 years ago. The good news is that eventually everything on the internet will able to be traced back to a specific account and computer which everyone will have access to. Don't be too shocked when many of those that proffesionaly poo poo 9/11 questions are discovered to be non existant accounts in goverment buildings.

#7 I have saved for last because it is the least talked about event of that day. I would be willing to bet that 90 percent of the population doesn't even know the circumstance of building 7 and the ones that have heard of it assume that the towers fell on it or some other crap they picked up that was spread around to confuse any questions.

#7 defies any logic whatsoever. The disinformation people have not come up with ANY reasonable scenerio. They have just ignored it because there is no airplane or muslim to blame it on. It didn't happen at a supposed secure property like the pentagon where there was no public access. It didn't happen way out in the woods where it could be cordoned off and the scene could be anything someone wanted it to be.

Yes number 7.... Not tall enough to blame fire..It is not difficult to fight a fire in a ten story building. It makes an interesting problem for those that must include it in the overall cover up. This is the one where rationality completely goes south and they go straight to wacko conspiracy theoriests. They do not question that a ten story building just falls down. That is because there is NO rational excuse for it.

If this had happened anywhere else but a couple of blocks from the towers it would be one of the most talked about mysteries of all time. No...It is one of the least talked about mysteries of all time. Odd.

uh, huggy, WTC7 was a 47 story building
one that had been evacuated HOURS before it collapsed

I just watched a couple of videos of #7 for the first time. There is no smoke coming out of any visible sides of the building. You don't find THAT odd if there was enough fire and heat to "fully engulf" the building? I have never seen a fully engulfed building that didn't belch smoke and fire from every window. Here we have a fully engulfed building ..theoretically so "fully engulfed" that all of the steel support collums fail at the same exact momet?

You people are beyond laughable.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Take a deep breath there sparky! Oh and your sig is too big..tidy it up and remove the stupid quotes... The people you are aguing with are not on this thread to learn anything. They received thier marching orders 9 years ago. The good news is that eventually everything on the internet will able to be traced back to a specific account and computer which everyone will have access to. Don't be too shocked when many of those that proffesionaly poo poo 9/11 questions are discovered to be non existant accounts in goverment buildings.

#7 I have saved for last because it is the least talked about event of that day. I would be willing to bet that 90 percent of the population doesn't even know the circumstance of building 7 and the ones that have heard of it assume that the towers fell on it or some other crap they picked up that was spread around to confuse any questions.

#7 defies any logic whatsoever. The disinformation people have not come up with ANY reasonable scenerio. They have just ignored it because there is no airplane or muslim to blame it on. It didn't happen at a supposed secure property like the pentagon where there was no public access. It didn't happen way out in the woods where it could be cordoned off and the scene could be anything someone wanted it to be.

Yes number 7.... Not tall enough to blame fire..It is not difficult to fight a fire in a ten story building. It makes an interesting problem for those that must include it in the overall cover up. This is the one where rationality completely goes south and they go straight to wacko conspiracy theoriests. They do not question that a ten story building just falls down. That is because there is NO rational excuse for it.

If this had happened anywhere else but a couple of blocks from the towers it would be one of the most talked about mysteries of all time. No...It is one of the least talked about mysteries of all time. Odd.

uh, huggy, WTC7 was a 47 story building
one that had been evacuated HOURS before it collapsed

I just watched a couple of videos of #7 for the first time. There is no smoke coming out of any visible sides of the building. You don't find THAT odd if there was enough fire and heat to "fully engulf" the building? I have never seen a fully engulfed building that didn't belch smoke and fire from every window. Here we have a fully engulfed building ..theoretically so "fully engulfed" that all of the steel support collums fail at the same exact momet?

You people are beyond laughable.

Did you notice first that it was firefighters at the scene that said the building was "fully engulfed"? And did you by any chance see any photos of the south side of the building? My guess is that you did not because the smoke and fire obscured the entire south of the building. so much that they couldn't even tell exactly how badly damaged the building was.

 

[eots]

Take a deep breath there sparky! Oh and your sig is too big..tidy it up and remove the stupid quotes... The people you are aguing with are not on this thread to learn anything. They received thier marching orders 9 years ago. The good news is that eventually everything on the internet will able to be traced back to a specific account and computer which everyone will have access to. Don't be too shocked when many of those that proffesionaly poo poo 9/11 questions are discovered to be non existant accounts in goverment buildings.

#7 I have saved for last because it is the least talked about event of that day. I would be willing to bet that 90 percent of the population doesn't even know the circumstance of building 7 and the ones that have heard of it assume that the towers fell on it or some other crap they picked up that was spread around to confuse any questions.

#7 defies any logic whatsoever. The disinformation people have not come up with ANY reasonable scenerio. They have just ignored it because there is no airplane or muslim to blame it on. It didn't happen at a supposed secure property like the pentagon where there was no public access. It didn't happen way out in the woods where it could be cordoned off and the scene could be anything someone wanted it to be.

Yes number 7.... Not tall enough to blame fire..It is not difficult to fight a fire in a ten story building. It makes an interesting problem for those that must include it in the overall cover up. This is the one where rationality completely goes south and they go straight to wacko conspiracy theoriests. They do not question that a ten story building just falls down. That is because there is NO rational excuse for it.

If this had happened anywhere else but a couple of blocks from the towers it would be one of the most talked about mysteries of all time. No...It is one of the least talked about mysteries of all time. Odd.

uh, huggy, WTC7 was a 47 story building
one that had been evacuated HOURS before it collapsed

I just watched a couple of videos of #7 for the first time. There is no smoke coming out of any visible sides of the building. You don't find THAT odd if there was enough fire and heat to "fully engulf" the building? I have never seen a fully engulfed building that didn't belch smoke and fire from every window. Here we have a fully engulfed building ..theoretically so "fully engulfed" that all of the steel support collums fail at the same exact momet?

You people are beyond laughable.

and apparently the entire inside structure fell almost silently within wtc7 before the facade collapsed...I mean wouldn't that of made almost as much dust and noise as the facade falling ?

 

[DiveCon]

Take a deep breath there sparky! Oh and your sig is too big..tidy it up and remove the stupid quotes... The people you are aguing with are not on this thread to learn anything. They received thier marching orders 9 years ago. The good news is that eventually everything on the internet will able to be traced back to a specific account and computer which everyone will have access to. Don't be too shocked when many of those that proffesionaly poo poo 9/11 questions are discovered to be non existant accounts in goverment buildings.

#7 I have saved for last because it is the least talked about event of that day. I would be willing to bet that 90 percent of the population doesn't even know the circumstance of building 7 and the ones that have heard of it assume that the towers fell on it or some other crap they picked up that was spread around to confuse any questions.

#7 defies any logic whatsoever. The disinformation people have not come up with ANY reasonable scenerio. They have just ignored it because there is no airplane or muslim to blame it on. It didn't happen at a supposed secure property like the pentagon where there was no public access. It didn't happen way out in the woods where it could be cordoned off and the scene could be anything someone wanted it to be.

Yes number 7.... Not tall enough to blame fire..It is not difficult to fight a fire in a ten story building. It makes an interesting problem for those that must include it in the overall cover up. This is the one where rationality completely goes south and they go straight to wacko conspiracy theoriests. They do not question that a ten story building just falls down. That is because there is NO rational excuse for it.

If this had happened anywhere else but a couple of blocks from the towers it would be one of the most talked about mysteries of all time. No...It is one of the least talked about mysteries of all time. Odd.

uh, huggy, WTC7 was a 47 story building
one that had been evacuated HOURS before it collapsed

I just watched a couple of videos of #7 for the first time. There is no smoke coming out of any visible sides of the building. You don't find THAT odd if there was enough fire and heat to "fully engulf" the building? I have never seen a fully engulfed building that didn't belch smoke and fire from every window. Here we have a fully engulfed building ..theoretically so "fully engulfed" that all of the steel support collums fail at the same exact momet?

You people are beyond laughable.

then you havent seen the ones of the other sides

 

[HUGGY]

uh, huggy, WTC7 was a 47 story building
one that had been evacuated HOURS before it collapsed

I just watched a couple of videos of #7 for the first time. There is no smoke coming out of any visible sides of the building. You don't find THAT odd if there was enough fire and heat to "fully engulf" the building? I have never seen a fully engulfed building that didn't belch smoke and fire from every window. Here we have a fully engulfed building ..theoretically so "fully engulfed" that all of the steel support collums fail at the same exact momet?

You people are beyond laughable.

and apparently the entire inside structure fell almost silently within wtc7 before the facade collapsed...I mean wouldn't that of made almost as much dust and noise as the facade falling ?

If all of the interior floors collapsed......The preassure differential would have blown every window out of the building. That never happened.

 

[PhysicsExist]

uh, huggy, WTC7 was a 47 story building
one that had been evacuated HOURS before it collapsed

I just watched a couple of videos of #7 for the first time. There is no smoke coming out of any visible sides of the building. You don't find THAT odd if there was enough fire and heat to "fully engulf" the building? I have never seen a fully engulfed building that didn't belch smoke and fire from every window. Here we have a fully engulfed building ..theoretically so "fully engulfed" that all of the steel support collums fail at the same exact momet?

You people are beyond laughable.

then you havent seen the ones of the other sides

A video is a video DiveCon, physics are physics. Deal with the truth, stop fearing it.

How are you allowed to own a keyboard? You are an imbecile. Can someone be banned for being mentally handicapped? Pardon me, but I'm serious. DiveCon, you have a chemical imbalance in the very basics of brain function, which has been relevant for awhile but I feel as if it HAS to be mentioned now. I am astounded that you are even tolerated on these boards amongst your peers, let alone I can't imagine the type of parenting you received, because there's something very deeply wrong with you as a human being.

 

[HUGGY]

uh, huggy, WTC7 was a 47 story building
one that had been evacuated HOURS before it collapsed

I just watched a couple of videos of #7 for the first time. There is no smoke coming out of any visible sides of the building. You don't find THAT odd if there was enough fire and heat to "fully engulf" the building? I have never seen a fully engulfed building that didn't belch smoke and fire from every window. Here we have a fully engulfed building ..theoretically so "fully engulfed" that all of the steel support collums fail at the same exact momet?

You people are beyond laughable.

then you havent seen the ones of the other sides

I don't need to. Enough heat to melt steel is way more than needed to melt out the windows. ALL of the windows.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Wow, P E really is a nutcase. Not one intelligent comment about the expert eyewitnesses who were on the scene who stated that the building was going to collapse. I guess they're statements just don't fit in with the controlled demo.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I just watched a couple of videos of #7 for the first time. There is no smoke coming out of any visible sides of the building. You don't find THAT odd if there was enough fire and heat to "fully engulf" the building? I have never seen a fully engulfed building that didn't belch smoke and fire from every window. Here we have a fully engulfed building ..theoretically so "fully engulfed" that all of the steel support collums fail at the same exact momet?

You people are beyond laughable.

then you havent seen the ones of the other sides

I don't need to. Enough heat to melt steel is way more than needed to melt out the windows. ALL of the windows.

You do understand that only the truthers claim that steel was melted?

 

[PhysicsExist]

then you havent seen the ones of the other sides

I don't need to. Enough heat to melt steel is way more than needed to melt out the windows. ALL of the windows.

You do understand that only the truthers claim that steel was melted?

Why do you claim such fallacies? You should have more respect for YOURSELF, because it is very ignorant and naive to claim false facts, as fact. Here is your melted steel.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCdRA09pztM[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lihj-Kz9wjY&feature=related[/ame]

Is all of this evidence fake? Can you rebuttal these facts?

Are you man enough to redact your claim that only 'Truthers' claim there was molten steel?

 

[eots]

Wow, P E really is a nutcase. Not one intelligent comment about the expert eyewitnesses who were on the scene who stated that the building was going to collapse. I guess they're statements just don't fit in with the controlled demo.

yes I commented..this statement is in total contradiction to multiple actual eyewitnesses and with the findings of NIST

 

[SFC Ollie]

I believe a firefighter when he tells me about a fire, When he actually tests the so called molten "Steel" let me know. My bet is they saw aluminum or some other compound.

And you do understand that thermite only burns for a few moments? It cannot cause molten rivers of steel days later.