Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
These 9/11 threads always end up in the same crash and burn scenario. I suggest to the OP focusing on the physics related anomalies and steer clear of the priori judgement values placed on the who, what and how.
still waitingdipshit..
your funny.REAL photos prove your propaganda from that propaganda debwunker link bullshit.another agent has penetraed this site.
the picture posted CLEARLY shows that WTC 7 was not several blocks away from the towers. Are you claiming the image is not a true representation of thr footprint of the buildings involved? If so, let's see YOUR version of the building positions.
there are no physics related anomalies just wrong and bias interpretations of it!......like these:Physics911, by Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven, 9/11/2001These 9/11 threads always end up in the same crash and burn scenario. I suggest to the OP focusing on the physics related anomalies and steer clear of the priori judgement values placed on the who, what and how.
that's "you're" and "penetrated"No jet plane has ever crashed into a skyscraper, yet you want me to believe that the planners not only designed a building specifically withstand a jet plane slamming into it, but to withstand multiple plane crashes??? they built the buildings to withstand multiples of an incident that has never before occured???
Here is where this loyal Bush dupe shoots himself in the foot.He cant get around the collapse of bld 7.Bld 7 was SEVERAL blocks away from the towers and had minimal damage done to it.very little debris from the towers struck it and the fires were very small.The buildings next door to the towers were SEVERLY damaged by debris.The majority of the debris hit them and had far more extensive damage done to them and had for more serious fires in them and the photos show they are far more damaged than BLD 7!!!!!! the damage to them is 100 times greater than what happened to bld 7 yet THOSE structures remained standing and did not collapse.He cant get around that fact or the witness testimony of Barry Jennings from bld 7 which he has demonstrated he has no interest in knowing about since obviously,he is in denial.
and here i was with the mistaken belief that he was interested in the truth about 9/11 and the collapse of the towers.my mistake.
liar...
Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - World Trade Center 7, Building 7
your funny.REAL photos prove your propaganda from that propaganda debwunker link bullshit.another agent has penetraed this site.
No jet plane has ever crashed into a skyscraper, yet you want me to believe that the planners not only designed a building specifically withstand a jet plane slamming into it, but to withstand multiple plane crashes??? they built the buildings to withstand multiples of an incident that has never before occured???
Here is where this loyal Bush dupe shoots himself in the foot.He cant get around the collapse of bld 7.Bld 7 was SEVERAL blocks away from the towers and had minimal damage done to it.very little debris from the towers struck it and the fires were very small.The buildings next door to the towers were SEVERLY damaged by debris.The majority of the debris hit them and had far more extensive damage done to them and had for more serious fires in them and the photos show they are far more damaged than BLD 7!!!!!! the damage to them is 100 times greater than what happened to bld 7 yet THOSE structures remained standing and did not collapse.He cant get around that fact or the witness testimony of Barry Jennings from bld 7 which he has demonstrated he has no interest in knowing about since obviously,he is in denial.
and here i was with the mistaken belief that he was interested in the truth about 9/11 and the collapse of the towers.my mistake.
I did not realise I was dealing with a coincidence theorist who buys into the bizarre coincidence that all 3 towers were owned by silverstein and they were the ONLY towers that collapsed that day yet none of the others not owned by silverstein damaged far worse than it was, remained standing.
handjob never lets fact get in his way....No jet plane has ever crashed into a skyscraper, yet you want me to believe that the planners not only designed a building specifically withstand a jet plane slamming into it, but to withstand multiple plane crashes??? they built the buildings to withstand multiples of an incident that has never before occured???
Here is where this loyal Bush dupe shoots himself in the foot.He cant get around the collapse of bld 7.Bld 7 was SEVERAL blocks away from the towers and had minimal damage done to it.very little debris from the towers struck it and the fires were very small.The buildings next door to the towers were SEVERLY damaged by debris.The majority of the debris hit them and had far more extensive damage done to them and had for more serious fires in them and the photos show they are far more damaged than BLD 7!!!!!! the damage to them is 100 times greater than what happened to bld 7 yet THOSE structures remained standing and did not collapse.He cant get around that fact or the witness testimony of Barry Jennings from bld 7 which he has demonstrated he has no interest in knowing about since obviously,he is in denial.
and here i was with the mistaken belief that he was interested in the truth about 9/11 and the collapse of the towers.my mistake.
I did not realise I was dealing with a coincidence theorist who buys into the bizarre coincidence that all 3 towers were owned by silverstein and they were the ONLY towers that collapsed that day yet none of the others not owned by silverstein damaged far worse than it was, remained standing.
It was across the street dumbfuck.
It's a real birds eye representation of the WTC complex. What is more interesting, is the ~2 dozen cars in the parking lot across West St. parallel to the Verizon building that "spontaneously" "popped off" or combusted (according to eye witness testimony) that day without being in any direct line of the debris field and no debris found in the area.
that is a much more interesting topic than arguing about where wtc7 is located in conjunction with expressions of "blocks away".
there are no physics related anomalies just wrong and bias interpretations of it!......like these:Physics911, by Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven, 9/11/2001These 9/11 threads always end up in the same crash and burn scenario. I suggest to the OP focusing on the physics related anomalies and steer clear of the priori judgement values placed on the who, what and how.
9/11 Anomalies
A Priory of Science
etc...
all wrong all specious, inconclusive make believe!
No jet plane has ever crashed into a skyscraper, yet you want me to believe that the planners not only designed a building specifically withstand a jet plane slamming into it, but to withstand multiple plane crashes??? they built the buildings to withstand multiples of an incident that has never before occured???
Here is where this loyal Bush dupe shoots himself in the foot.He cant get around the collapse of bld 7.Bld 7 was SEVERAL blocks away from the towers and had minimal damage done to it.very little debris from the towers struck it and the fires were very small.The buildings next door to the towers were SEVERLY damaged by debris.The majority of the debris hit them and had far more extensive damage done to them and had for more serious fires in them and the photos show they are far more damaged than BLD 7!!!!!! the damage to them is 100 times greater than what happened to bld 7 yet THOSE structures remained standing and did not collapse.He cant get around that fact or the witness testimony of Barry Jennings from bld 7 which he has demonstrated he has no interest in knowing about since obviously,he is in denial.
and here i was with the mistaken belief that he was interested in the truth about 9/11 and the collapse of the towers.my mistake.
liar...
Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - World Trade Center 7, Building 7
your funny.REAL photos prove your propaganda from that propaganda debwunker link bullshit.another agent has penetraed this site.
Building 7's Location
Building 7 occupied a city block immediately north of the World Trade Center complex. WTC 1 through WTC 6 were on the superblock bounded by West, Church, Liberty, and Vesey Streets. Building 7 was wedged between the Verizon and U.S. Post Office buildings across Vesey Street from the WTC complex. It straddled an electrical substation that filled the first two stories of about half the block.People who have heard of Building 7 tend to assume that 'ancillary damage' from the collapses of the Twin Towers had something to do with Building 7's collapse. It is important to note that Building 7 was no closer to the towers than any of several other large buildings outside of the WTC complex. The wall of Building 7 closest to the WTC complex was more than 300 feet from the nearest wall of the North Tower. It appears that most of the heavy fallout from the destruction of the North Tower landed short of Building 7. Building 6 stood between the North Tower and Building 7.
WTC7.net the hidden story of Building 7: Building 7's Location
Building 7's Location
Building 7 occupied a city block immediately north of the World Trade Center complex. WTC 1 through WTC 6 were on the superblock bounded by West, Church, Liberty, and Vesey Streets. Building 7 was wedged between the Verizon and U.S. Post Office buildings across Vesey Street from the WTC complex. It straddled an electrical substation that filled the first two stories of about half the block.People who have heard of Building 7 tend to assume that 'ancillary damage' from the collapses of the Twin Towers had something to do with Building 7's collapse. It is important to note that Building 7 was no closer to the towers than any of several other large buildings outside of the WTC complex. The wall of Building 7 closest to the WTC complex was more than 300 feet from the nearest wall of the North Tower. It appears that most of the heavy fallout from the destruction of the North Tower landed short of Building 7. Building 6 stood between the North Tower and Building 7.
WTC7.net the hidden story of Building 7: Building 7's Location
would you consider the picture i posted, or your description, to mean several city blocks away?
You say 'more than 300 feet' above.Building 7's Location
Building 7 occupied a city block immediately north of the World Trade Center complex. WTC 1 through WTC 6 were on the superblock bounded by West, Church, Liberty, and Vesey Streets. Building 7 was wedged between the Verizon and U.S. Post Office buildings across Vesey Street from the WTC complex. It straddled an electrical substation that filled the first two stories of about half the block.People who have heard of Building 7 tend to assume that 'ancillary damage' from the collapses of the Twin Towers had something to do with Building 7's collapse. It is important to note that Building 7 was no closer to the towers than any of several other large buildings outside of the WTC complex. The wall of Building 7 closest to the WTC complex was more than 300 feet from the nearest wall of the North Tower. It appears that most of the heavy fallout from the destruction of the North Tower landed short of Building 7. Building 6 stood between the North Tower and Building 7.
WTC7.net the hidden story of Building 7: Building 7's Location
would you consider the picture i posted, or your description, to mean several city blocks away?
your picture is a fish eye lens that distorts scale in the picture, distance in feet is the most accurate description
This is what large buildings should look like after extensive damage. The first two photos are of the massive fire that consumed the 32-story Windsor Building in Spain. That very large building did not collapse despite the extensive fire damage it received. The fire consumed the steel & concrete tower for 24 hours. The other photos are of the WTC buildings located right below the Towers. They suffered far more damage than WTC 7, yet were still standing...
as those pics prove,there have been fires in high rise towers far more serious than then ones in the twin towers but for the first time in history,these towers collapsed due to fires even though they were not lit up like a torch like those were.and you cant come back with jet fuel weakened them to make them collapse either because jet fuel does not burn hot enough to have that kind of effect and as i have said many times before on this thread,the towers were designed to take hits from MULTIPLE airliners.You say 'more than 300 feet' above.would you consider the picture i posted, or your description, to mean several city blocks away?
your picture is a fish eye lens that distorts scale in the picture, distance in feet is the most accurate description
300 feet is the length of a football field (100 yards). That is NOT several city blocks.
How big is a City Block?
Even if you take the highest number of city blocks per mile from this link, giving you the smallest block size (264 feet), it would still only come out to 1.1 city blocks distance between the tower and building 7.
Conclusion based on science and NOT nonsense: Building 7 was NOT 'several blocks away' from the nearest tower.
oh and i dont spend my entire day on the computer so cut me some slack on just getting back on this now will ya?These 9/11 threads always end up in the same crash and burn scenario. I suggest to the OP focusing on the physics related anomalies and steer clear of the priori judgement values placed on the who, what and how.
I appreciate that. If it was the truth I was looking for, then I would take your advice. My puropse was to delve into the conspiracy with people who were familiar with it. Conspiracy theories fascinate me, even if I don't believe them.
These 9/11 threads always end up in the same crash and burn scenario. I suggest to the OP focusing on the physics related anomalies and steer clear of the priori judgement values placed on the who, what and how.
I appreciate that. If it was the truth I was looking for, then I would take your advice. My puropse was to delve into the conspiracy with people who were familiar with it. Conspiracy theories fascinate me, even if I don't believe them.
He just proved it in his OWN words right here in black in white,this dude has NO INTEREST in the truth on what happened on 9/11 even ADMITTING it here.In other words conspiracy theories like the governments that 19 muslims highjacked the planes and jet fuel fires caused the collapse of the towers is the only thing he wants to know about.
not worth the bother anymore.
These 9/11 threads always end up in the same crash and burn scenario. I suggest to the OP focusing on the physics related anomalies and steer clear of the priori judgement values placed on the who, what and how.
I appreciate that. If it was the truth I was looking for, then I would take your advice. My puropse was to delve into the conspiracy with people who were familiar with it. Conspiracy theories fascinate me, even if I don't believe them.
He just proved it in his OWN words right here in black in white,this dude has NO INTEREST in the truth on what happened on 9/11 even ADMITTING it here.In other words conspiracy theories like the governments that 19 muslims highjacked the planes and jet fuel fires caused the collapse of the towers is the only thing he wants to know about.
not worth the bother anymore.
