There's More to 9-11 Then Fires and Freefall

[PhysicsExist]

eots you should just put the trolls on ignore, they lack normal brain efficiencies, and are here to just annoy you and distract from the facts lol

 

[DiveCon]

eots you should just put the trolls on ignore, they lack normal brain efficiencies, and are here to just annoy you and distract from the facts lol

how could he?
he's have to put himself on ignore too'

all you troofer morons are TROLLS

 

[eots]

Opinions are like assholes, eots. Everyone has them and some really smell like ass. None of the people you just presented have any evidence their opinions are actually true.

and gave very valid reasons why this evidence is hard to obtain without a legitimate investigation...just like many police investigations the evidence is found during the course of investigating the theory..but who's opinions you think should carry more gravitas a German defense minister or some guy parroting the popular mechanics narrative ?

 

[Patriot911]

Opinions are like assholes, eots. Everyone has them and some really smell like ass. None of the people you just presented have any evidence their opinions are actually true.

You dont have anything but commentary. Here are some more facts for you to avoid. You're disgusting.

Want to see utterly disgusting? Go look in a mirror you piece of filthy shit! You will see an ignorant asshole staring back at you. Someone so fucking stupid he can't even pull his head out of his ass long enough to notice his theory has been shot to hell.

WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:

It also displayed the characteristics of a building collapsing due to structural failure.

1. Rapid onset of collapse

Wrong. You clearly see the collapse starting several seconds before the main collapse.

2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a second before the building's destruction

Wrong. No audio tapes show this explosion even though they clearly record the collapse. You CONSTANTLY run like a little bitch from this fact. Why? Because it clearly destroys your claim that there had to be explosives.

3.Symmetrical "structural failure" -- through the path of greatest resistance -- at free-fall acceleration

More bullshit from you. How can you claim symmetrical structural failure when you can clearly see the penthouse go down before the rest? Run away, little bitch! RUN AWAY!

4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed in its own footprint

Wrong again. You've already been shown damage to other buildings too high to be caused by debris falling inside the footprint.

5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds

More completely ignorant bullshit from you! How fucking stupid are you? "Pyroclastic" means of volcanic origin you dipshit! Now, if you're talking about the flow of dust, that happens in any collapse and isn't caused by the explosives. Another epic failure on your part.

6. Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional

Bullshit. They showed him a video and asked his opinion and then lied about it! Yeah, real convincing. He also wasn't the "top European controlled demolition professional". Do you just pull this shit out of your ass when you write or do you work off some script?

Here is an excellent debunking of the AE911 bullshitters

7. Fore-knowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY

Holy shit! So the FDNY does their job and recognizes the collapse potential of the building, warns everyone and somehow you pieces of shit claim this is evidence of a CD? That is HYSTERICAL! You fuckers are incredibly desperate for anything aren't you!

In the the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendary devices was discovered:

Wait. I thought you like to pretend it was explosives. Incindiaries are NOT explosives.

8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples

And?

9. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly-qualified witnesses

Really? So now they're not only metalurgical experts, but know how much it weighed?!?

10. Chemical signature of thermite (high tech incendiary) found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples

Yeah. The chemical signature of thermite is aluminum and ferric oxide which is more commonly known as rust. REALLY RARE STUFF!

Get a life, PE. You've made a complete ass out of yourself here to the point you have negative credibility. People are more likely to believe you're lying even if it sounds reasonable.

 

[eots]

eots you should just put the trolls on ignore, they lack normal brain efficiencies, and are here to just annoy you and distract from the facts lol

how could he?
he's have to put himself on ignore too'

all you troofer morons are TROLLS

???????

 

[DiveCon]

eots you should just put the trolls on ignore, they lack normal brain efficiencies, and are here to just annoy you and distract from the facts lol

how could he?
he'd have to put himself on ignore too'

all you troofer morons are TROLLS

???????

typo

better?

 

[Patriot911]

Opinions are like assholes, eots. Everyone has them and some really smell like ass. None of the people you just presented have any evidence their opinions are actually true.

and gave very valid reasons why this evidence is hard to obtain without a legitimate investigation...just like many police investigations the evidence is found during the course of investigating the theory..but who's opinions you think should carry more gravitas a German defense minister or some guy parroting the popular mechanics narrative ?

Well, let's see.... the German defense minister is talking out his ass, while the guy relying on the PM narrative has the facts to back up his opinion. I believe I am going to go with the guy armed with the facts instead of the asshole stating his opinion.

As for a "legitimate investigation", who do you propose carry out this investigation? Alex Jones? Richard Gage? Or do you have another lying asshole in mind?

 

[DiveCon]

Opinions are like assholes, eots. Everyone has them and some really smell like ass. None of the people you just presented have any evidence their opinions are actually true.

and gave very valid reasons why this evidence is hard to obtain without a legitimate investigation...just like many police investigations the evidence is found during the course of investigating the theory..but who's opinions you think should carry more gravitas a German defense minister or some guy parroting the popular mechanics narrative ?

so, you have NO EVIDENCE, and you believe the people that actually HAVE the evidence are hiding the evidence that proves you correct?

 

[eots]

Want to see utterly disgusting? Go look in a mirror you piece of filthy shit! You will see an ignorant asshole staring back at you. Someone so fucking stupid he can't even pull his head out of his ass long enough to notice his theory has been shot to hell.

blah blah blah blah

It also displayed the characteristics of a building collapsing due to structural failure.

no it did not

Wrong. You clearly see the collapse starting several seconds before the main collapse.

no you see the penthouse collapse in less than two secs because the main column had been blown

More bullshit from you. How can you claim symmetrical structural failure when you can clearly see the penthouse go down before the rest? Run away, little bitch! RUN AWAY! :

how does the penthouse dropping make the collapse non-symmetrical you ninny...NIST referred to the collapse as symmetrical !

More completely ignorant bullshit from you! How fucking stupid are you? "Pyroclastic" means of volcanic origin you dipshit! Now, if you're talking about the flow of dust, that happens in any collapse and isn't caused by the explosives. Another epic failure on your part.

you got your science degree where exactly ??

Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng – Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden. Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award and the Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988). Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986). Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000. Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers. Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology. 37 year NASA career.

Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:


"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Center]."

Wait. I thought you like to pretend it was explosives. Incindiaries are NOT explosives.

yes they most certainly are "science guy"

High explosive incendiary - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah. The chemical signature of thermite is aluminum and ferric oxide which is more commonly known as rust. REALLY RARE STUFF!

its not that simple go try to light some rust on fire then moron

lol

 

[eots]

Opinions are like assholes, eots. Everyone has them and some really smell like ass. None of the people you just presented have any evidence their opinions are actually true.

and gave very valid reasons why this evidence is hard to obtain without a legitimate investigation...just like many police investigations the evidence is found during the course of investigating the theory..but who's opinions you think should carry more gravitas a German defense minister or some guy parroting the popular mechanics narrative ?

Well, let's see.... the German defense minister is talking out his ass, while the guy relying on the PM narrative has the facts to back up his opinion. I believe I am going to go with the guy armed with the facts instead of the asshole stating his opinion.

As for a "legitimate investigation", who do you propose carry out this investigation? Alex Jones? Richard Gage? Or do you have another lying asshole in mind?

I think the individuals selected by the family steering committee and their proposed commissioner would be acceptable

Capt. Edgar Mitchell, U.S. Navy (ret), BS Industrial Management, BS Aeronautical Engineering, Doctor of Science, Aeronautics and Astronautics from MIT – Pilot and Astronaut. Sixth man to walk on the moon (Apollo 14 mission). Patrol bomber and attack plane pilot, U.S. Navy. Test Pilot, Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 5 (VX-5). Chief of Project Management Division, Navy Field Office for the Manned Orbiting Laboratory Project. Graduated first in his class from the Aerospace Research Pilot School, and served as an instructor there. Recipient of many awards and honors including the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the USN Distinguished Medal and three NASA Group Achievement Awards. Inducted to the Space Hall of Fame in 1979 and the Astronaut Hall of Fame in 1998. Recipient of honorary doctorates in engineering from New Mexico State University, the University of Akron, Carnegie Mellon University, and a ScD from Embry-Riddle University. Founder of the Institute of Noetic Sciences.

Endorser of and proposed Commissioner of a New Investigation into 9/11


and btw what facts do you claim the NIST report or 9/11 commision report provide that prove there was not prior knowledge or complicity and that building 7 fell from fire ??

 

[PhysicsExist]

eots > trolls

this parrot911 guy is a joke, tries to get someone riled up by calling them names and avoiding the facts they post. Lol, typical immaturity when you can't handle the facts.

Only explosives can instantaneously remove 8 stories allowing the upper structure to accelerate downwards in free fall. The absolute free fall of Building 7 over a period of 2.25 seconds is by itself overwhelming evidence that explosives were used to bring down the building.

 

[DiveCon]

still waiting for ANY troofer to address goof-o-phera's concrete core

 

[Rat in the Hat]

I watched this, and have a couple of questions about this video, my friend.

Do you really believe Rivera is on your side when he refers to the truth members as "the most obnoxious protesters in recent years" and tells them to "get a life"?

And why does Bob McIlvaine waffle and evade when Rivera asks him if he thinks the 1400 engineers and architects support his contention that it was an inside job?

Finally, on a further note, you do understand that Geraldo only runs segments that will bring viewers and ratings for his program, right? He will do and say anything for his own advantage.

Rivera did a 2 hour special in 1986, digging out a dirt filled vault under a sidewalk in Chicago because he thought it was Al Capone's secret hiding place. He thought it would boost his ratings. When all was said and done, he only found a couple of empty bottles. It took him years to get over that humiliation.

Geraldo should not be your go-to guy. You need to find someone who has some credibility.

And this above all else proves the bullshit of the "truth" movement.

PE pisses and moans that no one will watch his/her videos because they "are afraid of the truth".

I watch one of them, then ask him/her to answer some questions. Instead of doing so, he/she blows right by, and posts a nonsense number of cultists to his/her theory.

"Truthers" just expect us to believe their malarkey without question because they are in sole possession of "the truth". And they consider questioning of "the truth" to be beneath them, and not worthy of a reply.

In my opinion, PE refused to reply because he/she would have been answering from a position of weakness. Any attempt on his/her part to reply now would be nothing but a weak attempt to save face, because he/she would have answered already had the facts been on his/her side. Instead all it could do was try to show that 1412 cult members mean more than all the other people on a planet of over 6 billion human beings.

So you are so completely deluded you believe that the other 6 billion people on the planet support the Bush administration version of events and this fallacy is the premise of your arguments

No, my point is that there are far more than 1412 engineers in a population of 6 billion people, and the greatest percentage of them do not believe FizzleExpiss' theory.

There are also far more then 1412 architects in a population of 6 billion, and again the greatest percentage do not believe FizzleExpiss.

There are also more then 1412 scientists, and again, they do not believe FizzleExpiss.

Do I need to repeat this for all of the chemists, metalurgists, demolitions experts, etc?

FizzleExpiss is just here to repeat the talking points of Alex Jones, Dylan Avery and Christophera, He has no mind or opinions of his own.

If he did, he would answer the questions I asked on 1/07/10 @ 02:28 AM

But he won't, because he can't.

I nailed him dead to rights, and he knows it.

 

[Fizz]

Only explosives can instantaneously remove 8 stories allowing the upper structure to accelerate downwards in free fall.

says who?

 

[Patriot911]

Want to see utterly disgusting? Go look in a mirror you piece of filthy shit! You will see an ignorant asshole staring back at you. Someone so fucking stupid he can't even pull his head out of his ass long enough to notice his theory has been shot to hell.

blah blah blah blah

What.... you don't like it when someone describes you to a "T"? Tough shit ya whiner!

It also displayed the characteristics of a building collapsing due to structural failure.

no it did not

Really? So now you're an expert on collapses? Perhaps you can tell us exactly how WTC 7 should have collapsed if the internal structures failed as described by the NIST. No? You mean you're talking out your ass again with nothing to back up your lameassed claims? I thought so.

no you see the penthouse collapse in less than two secs because the main column had been blown

Really? Why don't we hear the explosion? We hear the rest of the collapse. Every other collapse ever caught on audio clearly has the explosions many times louder than the collapse itself, yet we don't hear a single pop on 9/11. This is a fact neither you nor any other truthtard has been able to address.

how does the penthouse dropping make the collapse non-symmetrical you ninny...NIST referred to the collapse as symmetrical !

The external collapse was fairly symmetrical, but the internal collapse was anything but. The fact you had internal collapse before the external collapse makes it assymetrical by defintion.

you got your science degree where exactly ??

Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng – Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden. Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award and the Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988). Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986). Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000. Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers. Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology. 37 year NASA career.

Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Center]."

Wow! Thanks for proving beyond any doubt I am smarter than the fucking ignorant turds over at AE911 truth no matter what kind of bullshit degrees they give themselves. Look it up, fucker!

The fact this asshole lies about "massive structural members being hurled horizontally" proves he is a dishonest fuck like the rest of the truthtards. Truthtards like to pretend stuff was hurled horizontally by showing pictures. Anyone watching the videos knows nothing was "hurled horizontally". If there was, you truthtards would be all over it.

Wait. I thought you like to pretend it was explosives. Incindiaries are NOT explosives.

yes they most certainly are "science guy"

High explosive incendiary - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You stupid fuck! Did you bother to even READ what you linked? Two different components in one shell. One to destroy via high explosives and one to catch the target on fire with the incindiary component. Thanks for proving my points that you are a moron and that high explosives are not incindiaries. High explosives cut with pressure. Incindiaries are designed to start fires or in other ways use high heat.

Yeah. The chemical signature of thermite is aluminum and ferric oxide which is more commonly known as rust. REALLY RARE STUFF!

its not that simple go try to light some rust on fire then moron

Chump, I've made and ignited my own thermite from rust and powdered aluminum. Wasn't that hard.

Anyone else notice eots wasn't able to actually show what makes thermite thermite; all he had was the moronic response of try to light rust.

 

[Patriot911]

I think the individuals selected by the family steering committee and their proposed commissioner would be acceptable

So you want you truthtards to put questionable people in charge of the investigation. So what investigative skills does Mitchell have? None. So how is this guy suppose to do a better job than the four million plus hours put in by the FBI?

Have you checked into Mitchell's other beliefs like ESP, remote healing and the claim our government has aliens it is hiding from the world? Yeah, with credibility like that you shitheads will have a great time convincing anyone. :roll:

and btw what facts do you claim the NIST report or 9/11 commision report provide that prove there was not prior knowledge or complicity and that building 7 fell from fire ??

You can't prove a negative, dipshit! The one fact you have is that not one shred of evidence exists that proves prior knowledge. Without that evidence, all you have is opinion. Do you have the evidence that proves prior knowledge?

 

[Patriot911]

eots you should just put the trolls on ignore, they lack normal brain efficiencies, and are here to just annoy you and distract from the facts lol

You should be kissing eots' ass, chickenshit! He at least has the balls to debate instead of just posting the same crap you cut and paste from AE911. You don't even have the brain power to come up with your own thoughts. What would you do without them?

 

[PhysicsExist]

eots you should just put the trolls on ignore, they lack normal brain efficiencies, and are here to just annoy you and distract from the facts lol

You should be kissing eots' ass, chickenshit! He at least has the balls to debate instead of just posting the same crap you cut and paste from AE911. You don't even have the brain power to come up with your own thoughts. What would you do without them?

Despite adjusting its inputs to achieve the desired result, the NIST model does not come close to reproducing the observed collapse:[ii]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuyZJl9YleY&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[Patriot911]

PE STILL can't address the facts, so he continues his nonsensical spamming. Classic neutered truthtard.

 

[PhysicsExist]

PE STILL can't address the facts, so he continues his nonsensical spamming. Classic neutered truthtard.

Facts:

More than six years after starting its investigation, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued its final report on Building 7 in November 2008. The most important part of NIST’s report was a collapse model that bore no resemblance to the observed collapse. In Part 3 of NIST Finally Admits Freefall, Mr. Chandler explains the centrality of the model in NIST’s investigation:

“NIST’s so-called investigation actually consists of finding a way to reproduce the mysterious collapse of the building using a computer model. The assumption is that if the computer model can be made to reproduce the observed collapse pattern, that must be how it happened… The very process of running the model until it produces the kind of results you’re looking for is called selection bias. If you think about it, NIST’s methodology is explicitly based on selection bias. Even if you can show what might have happened, it doesn’t show what actually did happen.”


Despite adjusting its inputs to achieve the desired result, the NIST model does not come close to reproducing the observed collapse:

This is also apparent by watching the two video animations of NIST’s collapse model and comparing them to video footage of the observed collapse.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuyZJl9YleY&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

The clearest discrepancy is the deformation of the external structure in the model, which does not occur in the observed collapse. Mr. Chandler identifies a second glaring discrepancy, saying:

“One fact we do know about NIST’s model is it does not allow for free fall. The best they could do is 5.4 seconds for the building to crumple down through 18 floors. Crumpling absorbs energy, and that makes free fall impossible. There’s nothing in the models we have been shown that even resemble a three-stage collapse with a free fall component. After all, as Shyam Sunder put it himself, ‘free fall happens only when there are no structural components below the falling section of the building.’ Any natural scenario is going to involve a progression of failures and these don’t happen instantaneously.”


Although NIST’s model is false, based on its failure to reproduce the observed collapse, it cannot be falsified because NIST did not release its modeling data. Mr. Chandler explains:

“NIST claims their computer model can account for the observed phenomena, so let’s look at NIST’s model – except we can’t. The software they used to do the modeling is available, but their model actually consists of all the numbers and measurements and assumptions together with any tweaks to the system they might have used to get it to come out the way they wanted. If that information were released, their results could be checked by anyone with the appropriate skills and software tools. But NIST has not released the numbers. All we have been shown are some of the selected animated outputs they were able to get their model to produce… The very fact that NIST has not released their model strongly suggests they don’t want their results checked. In other words, their results are intended to be taken strictly on faith.”

You can't handle them.