what happened on 9/11/2001?

[SAYIT]

I invite you to read the NIST investigation, the most comprehensive ever done on the collapse of WTC 7.

Yeah, it only took them several years after the fact to acknowledge that it happened.

Horse shit ... but that seems to be your only play.

You're correct. My bd. So many bad reports and fraud. It was the commission report that omitted wtc7 entirely.
NIST just made huge errors in its reports and supposed scientific investigation. Here is the latest white paper on NIST failures over wtc7.

8216 Official 8217 NIST Report Shattered by Architects Engineers for 9 11 Truth White Paper The Millennium Report

The NIST findings were an attempt by humans to reconstruct something we had never before witnessed using computer simulations. I would find it very suspicious if there were no errors. The fact remains that if viewed with the same skeptical eye you reserve for the NIST report the alternate scenarios would not only come up short but would prove absolutely laughable.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I invite you to read the NIST investigation, the most comprehensive ever done on the collapse of WTC 7.

Yeah, it only took them several years after the fact to acknowledge that it happened.

Horse shit ... but that seems to be your only play.

You're correct. My bd. So many bad reports and fraud. It was the commission report that omitted wtc7 entirely.
NIST just made huge errors in its reports and supposed scientific investigation. Here is the latest white paper on NIST failures over wtc7.

8216 Official 8217 NIST Report Shattered by Architects Engineers for 9 11 Truth White Paper The Millennium Report

The NIST findings were an attempt by humans to reconstruct something we had never before witnessed using computer simulations. I would find it very suspicious if there were no errors. The fact remains that if viewed with the same skeptical eye you reserve for the NIST report the alternate scenarios would not only come up short but would prove absolutely laughable.

I'm not a demolition theorist, either. But, it's nice to see you use some skepticism instead of lock stepping. Was that done because you oooops?

 

[daws101]

pathological hatred of government,

Ya, right, a pathological hatred of government
caused me to observe that the fall of WTC7 matches up perfectly to a controlled demolition. & caused me to observe that "FLT175" penetrated the WTC tower wall as would a ghost ..... ( or B movie special effects )

The facts of the events of 9/11/2001 make it abundantly clear
that there is something VERY wrong with this picture and it really doesn't matter of one is a Republican or Democrat or agnostic .... whatever ....
the facts are the facts and that is what matters.

Political affiliation or religious beliefs absolutely do not figure into the equation but one's mental stability certainly does.
The fact is the collapse of the towers and WTC7 matches up perfectly to a traumatic impact, chaotic fires fueled by tens of thousands of jet fuel and falling chunks of large buildings and, not surprisingly, that's EXACTLY what happened on 9/11.

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

true but it was severely damaged by wtc1 funny how you ass hats consistently leave that major piece of evidence out.
you play it like wtc7 was pristine and then just fell down...

 

[SAYIT]

pathological hatred of government,

Ya, right, a pathological hatred of government
caused me to observe that the fall of WTC7 matches up perfectly to a controlled demolition. & caused me to observe that "FLT175" penetrated the WTC tower wall as would a ghost ..... ( or B movie special effects )

The facts of the events of 9/11/2001 make it abundantly clear
that there is something VERY wrong with this picture and it really doesn't matter of one is a Republican or Democrat or agnostic .... whatever ....
the facts are the facts and that is what matters.

Political affiliation or religious beliefs absolutely do not figure into the equation but one's mental stability certainly does.
The fact is the collapse of the towers and WTC7 matches up perfectly to a traumatic impact, chaotic fires fueled by tens of thousands of jet fuel and falling chunks of large buildings and, not surprisingly, that's EXACTLY what happened on 9/11.

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

NIST says the fires started by that jet fuel absolutely were a factor. You have the right to make up your own "mind" ... not your own facts and as already mentioned, WTC7 was severely damaged by "falling chunks of large buildings."

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Yeah, it only took them several years after the fact to acknowledge that it happened.

The NIST rightly focused on WTC 1 and 2, where thousands of people actually died.

No one died in the collapse of WTC 7.....as the FDNY anticipated the collapse of the WTC 7 by hours and evacuated the area. They saw the massive structural damage, saw the uncontrolled fires consuming the building, and measured its slow structural failure, its bulging, its leaning over hours with the use of a transit. About 3 hours before the WTC 7 came down, the FDNY evacuated the area to prevent any loss of life. And accurately predicted the building's collapse due to fire to within about 30 minutes.

Why would I or any rational person ignore the FDNY on the collapse of WTC 7.....or the NIST, which conducted the most comprehensive investigation ever done on the building's collapse?

There job wasn't based on appeal to emotion fallacies, but nice try anyway.

No, the job of the FDNY was to assess fires and their dangers. They assessed WTC 7, its damage and its fires and concluded that the building would collapse due to fire and structural damage. And were able to narrow their prediction of its collapse to within about 30 minutes and successfully evacuate the area so that no lives were lose. That's how good their assessment was.

That's not an 'appeal to emotional fallacies'. That's expert eye witness testimony on site and for hours.....that you summarily ignore for no particular reason. And of course, the most extensive and comprehensive investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 ever conducted. Which you summarily ignore, again for no particular reason.

But why would a rational person ignore either the FDNY or the NIST on the reason that the WTC 7 fell?

You flopped, fella. We're discussing NIST inability to even acknowledge in their report for several years the destruction of WTC7, not what you believe (minus any proof) what the FDNY determined.

Appeal to emotion, moving the posts...all classic hints of someone running on fumes.

Not that I care.

Hey, you want to take a swing at this photo for me since you're on a tear about 9//1?

Bankers trust days after the event. Hit by falling debris. Can you explain to me the condition of the flange mid-photo?


.

asked and answered just not to your satisfaction

That's because satisfaction in this case requires more than simple bullshit conjecture. Sorry if that wont cut it. Doing what i do for a living means I understand thermodynamics. Saying "that flange was hit by falling debris" is fucking laughable.

But, I really do not care what one thinks on this subject. i just like winding you all up and watching you go at it.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

pathological hatred of government,

Ya, right, a pathological hatred of government
caused me to observe that the fall of WTC7 matches up perfectly to a controlled demolition. & caused me to observe that "FLT175" penetrated the WTC tower wall as would a ghost ..... ( or B movie special effects )

The facts of the events of 9/11/2001 make it abundantly clear
that there is something VERY wrong with this picture and it really doesn't matter of one is a Republican or Democrat or agnostic .... whatever ....
the facts are the facts and that is what matters.

Political affiliation or religious beliefs absolutely do not figure into the equation but one's mental stability certainly does.
The fact is the collapse of the towers and WTC7 matches up perfectly to a traumatic impact, chaotic fires fueled by tens of thousands of jet fuel and falling chunks of large buildings and, not surprisingly, that's EXACTLY what happened on 9/11.

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

NIST says the fires started by that jet fuel absolutely were a factor. You have the right to make up your own "mind" ... not your own facts and as already mentioned, WTC7 was severely damaged by "falling chunks of large buildings."

No, it does not.

 

[SAYIT]

I invite you to read the NIST investigation, the most comprehensive ever done on the collapse of WTC 7.

Yeah, it only took them several years after the fact to acknowledge that it happened.

Horse shit ... but that seems to be your only play.

You're correct. My bd. So many bad reports and fraud. It was the commission report that omitted wtc7 entirely.
NIST just made huge errors in its reports and supposed scientific investigation. Here is the latest white paper on NIST failures over wtc7.

8216 Official 8217 NIST Report Shattered by Architects Engineers for 9 11 Truth White Paper The Millennium Report

The NIST findings were an attempt by humans to reconstruct something we had never before witnessed using computer simulations. I would find it very suspicious if there were no errors. The fact remains that if viewed with the same skeptical eye you reserve for the NIST report the alternate scenarios would not only come up short but would prove absolutely laughable.

I'm not a demolition theorist, either. But, it's nice to see you use some skepticism instead of lock stepping. Was that done because you oooops?

Now try applying the same skepticism to any of the "Truther" scenarios and you will understand how I came to my conclusions.

 

[SAYIT]

The NIST rightly focused on WTC 1 and 2, where thousands of people actually died.

No one died in the collapse of WTC 7.....as the FDNY anticipated the collapse of the WTC 7 by hours and evacuated the area. They saw the massive structural damage, saw the uncontrolled fires consuming the building, and measured its slow structural failure, its bulging, its leaning over hours with the use of a transit. About 3 hours before the WTC 7 came down, the FDNY evacuated the area to prevent any loss of life. And accurately predicted the building's collapse due to fire to within about 30 minutes.

Why would I or any rational person ignore the FDNY on the collapse of WTC 7.....or the NIST, which conducted the most comprehensive investigation ever done on the building's collapse?

There job wasn't based on appeal to emotion fallacies, but nice try anyway.

No, the job of the FDNY was to assess fires and their dangers. They assessed WTC 7, its damage and its fires and concluded that the building would collapse due to fire and structural damage. And were able to narrow their prediction of its collapse to within about 30 minutes and successfully evacuate the area so that no lives were lose. That's how good their assessment was.

That's not an 'appeal to emotional fallacies'. That's expert eye witness testimony on site and for hours.....that you summarily ignore for no particular reason. And of course, the most extensive and comprehensive investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 ever conducted. Which you summarily ignore, again for no particular reason.

But why would a rational person ignore either the FDNY or the NIST on the reason that the WTC 7 fell?

You flopped, fella. We're discussing NIST inability to even acknowledge in their report for several years the destruction of WTC7, not what you believe (minus any proof) what the FDNY determined.

Appeal to emotion, moving the posts...all classic hints of someone running on fumes.

Not that I care.

Hey, you want to take a swing at this photo for me since you're on a tear about 9//1?

Bankers trust days after the event. Hit by falling debris. Can you explain to me the condition of the flange mid-photo?


.

asked and answered just not to your satisfaction

That's because satisfaction in this case requires more than simple bullshit conjecture. Sorry if that wont cut it. Doing what i do for a living means I understand thermodynamics. Saying "that flange was hit by falling debris" is fucking laughable.

But, I really do not care what one thinks on this subject. i just like winding you all up and watching you go at it.

In other words you're just a master-baiter. Got it.

 

[daws101]

The NIST rightly focused on WTC 1 and 2, where thousands of people actually died.

No one died in the collapse of WTC 7.....as the FDNY anticipated the collapse of the WTC 7 by hours and evacuated the area. They saw the massive structural damage, saw the uncontrolled fires consuming the building, and measured its slow structural failure, its bulging, its leaning over hours with the use of a transit. About 3 hours before the WTC 7 came down, the FDNY evacuated the area to prevent any loss of life. And accurately predicted the building's collapse due to fire to within about 30 minutes.

Why would I or any rational person ignore the FDNY on the collapse of WTC 7.....or the NIST, which conducted the most comprehensive investigation ever done on the building's collapse?

There job wasn't based on appeal to emotion fallacies, but nice try anyway.

No, the job of the FDNY was to assess fires and their dangers. They assessed WTC 7, its damage and its fires and concluded that the building would collapse due to fire and structural damage. And were able to narrow their prediction of its collapse to within about 30 minutes and successfully evacuate the area so that no lives were lose. That's how good their assessment was.

That's not an 'appeal to emotional fallacies'. That's expert eye witness testimony on site and for hours.....that you summarily ignore for no particular reason. And of course, the most extensive and comprehensive investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 ever conducted. Which you summarily ignore, again for no particular reason.

But why would a rational person ignore either the FDNY or the NIST on the reason that the WTC 7 fell?

You flopped, fella. We're discussing NIST inability to even acknowledge in their report for several years the destruction of WTC7, not what you believe (minus any proof) what the FDNY determined.

Appeal to emotion, moving the posts...all classic hints of someone running on fumes.

Not that I care.

Hey, you want to take a swing at this photo for me since you're on a tear about 9//1?

Bankers trust days after the event. Hit by falling debris. Can you explain to me the condition of the flange mid-photo?


.

asked and answered just not to your satisfaction

That's because satisfaction in this case requires more than simple bullshit conjecture. Sorry if that wont cut it. Doing what i do for a living means I understand thermodynamics. Saying "that flange was hit by falling debris" is fucking laughable.

But, I really do not care what one thinks on this subject. i just like winding you all up and watching you go at it.

then in my case you've failed I find it highly entertaining that some one who claims to be in the know about thermodynamics would be so ignorant about some very explainable damage.
but then again you're mental!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

There job wasn't based on appeal to emotion fallacies, but nice try anyway.

No, the job of the FDNY was to assess fires and their dangers. They assessed WTC 7, its damage and its fires and concluded that the building would collapse due to fire and structural damage. And were able to narrow their prediction of its collapse to within about 30 minutes and successfully evacuate the area so that no lives were lose. That's how good their assessment was.

That's not an 'appeal to emotional fallacies'. That's expert eye witness testimony on site and for hours.....that you summarily ignore for no particular reason. And of course, the most extensive and comprehensive investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 ever conducted. Which you summarily ignore, again for no particular reason.

But why would a rational person ignore either the FDNY or the NIST on the reason that the WTC 7 fell?

You flopped, fella. We're discussing NIST inability to even acknowledge in their report for several years the destruction of WTC7, not what you believe (minus any proof) what the FDNY determined.

Appeal to emotion, moving the posts...all classic hints of someone running on fumes.

Not that I care.

Hey, you want to take a swing at this photo for me since you're on a tear about 9//1?

Bankers trust days after the event. Hit by falling debris. Can you explain to me the condition of the flange mid-photo?


.

asked and answered just not to your satisfaction

That's because satisfaction in this case requires more than simple bullshit conjecture. Sorry if that wont cut it. Doing what i do for a living means I understand thermodynamics. Saying "that flange was hit by falling debris" is fucking laughable.

But, I really do not care what one thinks on this subject. i just like winding you all up and watching you go at it.

then in my case you've failed I find it highly entertaining that some one who claims to be in the know about thermodynamics would be so ignorant about some very explainable damage.
but then again you're mental!

Good one!

 

[SAYIT]

pathological hatred of government,

Ya, right, a pathological hatred of government
caused me to observe that the fall of WTC7 matches up perfectly to a controlled demolition. & caused me to observe that "FLT175" penetrated the WTC tower wall as would a ghost ..... ( or B movie special effects )

The facts of the events of 9/11/2001 make it abundantly clear
that there is something VERY wrong with this picture and it really doesn't matter of one is a Republican or Democrat or agnostic .... whatever ....
the facts are the facts and that is what matters.

Political affiliation or religious beliefs absolutely do not figure into the equation but one's mental stability certainly does.
The fact is the collapse of the towers and WTC7 matches up perfectly to a traumatic impact, chaotic fires fueled by tens of thousands of jet fuel and falling chunks of large buildings and, not surprisingly, that's EXACTLY what happened on 9/11.

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

NIST says the fires started by that jet fuel absolutely were a factor. You have the right to make up your own "mind" ... not your own facts and as already mentioned, WTC7 was severely damaged by "falling chunks of large buildings."

No, it does not.

About the NIST World Trade Center Disaster Investigation
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Objective 1: Determine why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed following the initial impacts of the aircraft.

• The two aircraft hit the towers at high speed and did considerable damage to principal structural components (core columns, floors, and perimeter columns) that were directly impacted by the aircraft or associated debris. However, the towers withstood the impacts and would have remained standing were it not for the dislodged insulation (fireproofing) and the subsequent multi-floor fires. The robustness of the perimeter frame-tube system and the large size of the buildings helped the towers withstand the impact. The structural system redistributed loads from places of aircraft impact, avoiding larger scale damage upon impact. The hat truss, a feature atop each tower which was intended to support a television antenna, prevented earlier collapse of the building core. In each tower, a different combination of impact damage and heat-weakened structural components contributed to the abrupt structural collapse.
• In WTC 1, the fires weakened the core columns and caused the floors on the south side of the building to sag. The floors pulled the heated south perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as columns on the south wall buckled. The top section of the building tilted to the south and began its descent. The time from aircraft impact to collapse initiation was largely determined by how long it took for the fires to weaken the building core and to reach the south side of the building and weaken the perimeter columns and floors.
• In WTC 2, the core was damaged severely at the southeast corner and was restrained by the east and south walls via the hat truss and the floors. The steady burning fires on the east side of the building caused the floors there to sag. The floors pulled the heated east perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as columns on the east wall buckled. The top section of the building tilted to the east and to the south and began its descent. The time from aircraft impact to collapse initiation was largely determined by the time for the fires to weaken the perimeter columns and floor assemblies on the east and the south sides of the building. WTC2 collapsed more quickly than WTC 1 because there was more aircraft damage to the building core, including one of the heavily loaded corner columns, and there were early and persistent fires on the east side of the building, where the aircraft had extensively dislodged insulation from the structural steel.
• The WTC towers likely would not have collapsed under the combined effects of aircraft impact damage and the extensive, multi-floor fires that were encountered on September11, 2001, if the thermal insulation had not been widely dislodged or had been only minimally dislodged by aircraft impact.
• In the absence of structural and insulation damage, a conventional fire substantially similar to or less intense than the fires encountered on September 11, 2001, likely would not have led to the collapse of a WTC tower.
• NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to September 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly showed that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward, until the dust clouds obscured the view.

OK? Your turn.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Ya, right, a pathological hatred of government
caused me to observe that the fall of WTC7 matches up perfectly to a controlled demolition. & caused me to observe that "FLT175" penetrated the WTC tower wall as would a ghost ..... ( or B movie special effects )

The facts of the events of 9/11/2001 make it abundantly clear
that there is something VERY wrong with this picture and it really doesn't matter of one is a Republican or Democrat or agnostic .... whatever ....
the facts are the facts and that is what matters.

Political affiliation or religious beliefs absolutely do not figure into the equation but one's mental stability certainly does.
The fact is the collapse of the towers and WTC7 matches up perfectly to a traumatic impact, chaotic fires fueled by tens of thousands of jet fuel and falling chunks of large buildings and, not surprisingly, that's EXACTLY what happened on 9/11.

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

NIST says the fires started by that jet fuel absolutely were a factor. You have the right to make up your own "mind" ... not your own facts and as already mentioned, WTC7 was severely damaged by "falling chunks of large buildings."

No, it does not.

About the NIST World Trade Center Disaster Investigation
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Objective 1: Determine why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed following the initial impacts of the aircraft.

• The two aircraft hit the towers at high speed and did considerable damage to principal structural components (core columns, floors, and perimeter columns) that were directly impacted by the aircraft or associated debris. However, the towers withstood the impacts and would have remained standing were it not for the dislodged insulation (fireproofing) and the subsequent multi-floor fires. The robustness of the perimeter frame-tube system and the large size of the buildings helped the towers withstand the impact. The structural system redistributed loads from places of aircraft impact, avoiding larger scale damage upon impact. The hat truss, a feature atop each tower which was intended to support a television antenna, prevented earlier collapse of the building core. In each tower, a different combination of impact damage and heat-weakened structural components contributed to the abrupt structural collapse.
• In WTC 1, the fires weakened the core columns and caused the floors on the south side of the building to sag. The floors pulled the heated south perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as columns on the south wall buckled. The top section of the building tilted to the south and began its descent. The time from aircraft impact to collapse initiation was largely determined by how long it took for the fires to weaken the building core and to reach the south side of the building and weaken the perimeter columns and floors.
• In WTC 2, the core was damaged severely at the southeast corner and was restrained by the east and south walls via the hat truss and the floors. The steady burning fires on the east side of the building caused the floors there to sag. The floors pulled the heated east perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as columns on the east wall buckled. The top section of the building tilted to the east and to the south and began its descent. The time from aircraft impact to collapse initiation was largely determined by the time for the fires to weaken the perimeter columns and floor assemblies on the east and the south sides of the building. WTC2 collapsed more quickly than WTC 1 because there was more aircraft damage to the building core, including one of the heavily loaded corner columns, and there were early and persistent fires on the east side of the building, where the aircraft had extensively dislodged insulation from the structural steel.
• The WTC towers likely would not have collapsed under the combined effects of aircraft impact damage and the extensive, multi-floor fires that were encountered on September11, 2001, if the thermal insulation had not been widely dislodged or had been only minimally dislodged by aircraft impact.
• In the absence of structural and insulation damage, a conventional fire substantially similar to or less intense than the fires encountered on September 11, 2001, likely would not have led to the collapse of a WTC tower.
• NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to September 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly showed that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward, until the dust clouds obscured the view.

OK? Your turn.

That doesn't even mention wtc7.

 

[SAYIT]

Political affiliation or religious beliefs absolutely do not figure into the equation but one's mental stability certainly does.
The fact is the collapse of the towers and WTC7 matches up perfectly to a traumatic impact, chaotic fires fueled by tens of thousands of jet fuel and falling chunks of large buildings and, not surprisingly, that's EXACTLY what happened on 9/11.

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

NIST says the fires started by that jet fuel absolutely were a factor. You have the right to make up your own "mind" ... not your own facts and as already mentioned, WTC7 was severely damaged by "falling chunks of large buildings."

No, it does not.

About the NIST World Trade Center Disaster Investigation
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Objective 1: Determine why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed following the initial impacts of the aircraft.

• The two aircraft hit the towers at high speed and did considerable damage to principal structural components (core columns, floors, and perimeter columns) that were directly impacted by the aircraft or associated debris. However, the towers withstood the impacts and would have remained standing were it not for the dislodged insulation (fireproofing) and the subsequent multi-floor fires. The robustness of the perimeter frame-tube system and the large size of the buildings helped the towers withstand the impact. The structural system redistributed loads from places of aircraft impact, avoiding larger scale damage upon impact. The hat truss, a feature atop each tower which was intended to support a television antenna, prevented earlier collapse of the building core. In each tower, a different combination of impact damage and heat-weakened structural components contributed to the abrupt structural collapse.
• In WTC 1, the fires weakened the core columns and caused the floors on the south side of the building to sag. The floors pulled the heated south perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as columns on the south wall buckled. The top section of the building tilted to the south and began its descent. The time from aircraft impact to collapse initiation was largely determined by how long it took for the fires to weaken the building core and to reach the south side of the building and weaken the perimeter columns and floors.
• In WTC 2, the core was damaged severely at the southeast corner and was restrained by the east and south walls via the hat truss and the floors. The steady burning fires on the east side of the building caused the floors there to sag. The floors pulled the heated east perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as columns on the east wall buckled. The top section of the building tilted to the east and to the south and began its descent. The time from aircraft impact to collapse initiation was largely determined by the time for the fires to weaken the perimeter columns and floor assemblies on the east and the south sides of the building. WTC2 collapsed more quickly than WTC 1 because there was more aircraft damage to the building core, including one of the heavily loaded corner columns, and there were early and persistent fires on the east side of the building, where the aircraft had extensively dislodged insulation from the structural steel.
• The WTC towers likely would not have collapsed under the combined effects of aircraft impact damage and the extensive, multi-floor fires that were encountered on September11, 2001, if the thermal insulation had not been widely dislodged or had been only minimally dislodged by aircraft impact.
• In the absence of structural and insulation damage, a conventional fire substantially similar to or less intense than the fires encountered on September 11, 2001, likely would not have led to the collapse of a WTC tower.
• NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to September 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly showed that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward, until the dust clouds obscured the view.

OK? Your turn.

That doesn't even mention wtc7.

Why would it? We're talking about the jet-fuel fires and your claim that NIST said the fuel was not a factor, remember?

 

[Skylar]

pathological hatred of government,

Ya, right, a pathological hatred of government
caused me to observe that the fall of WTC7 matches up perfectly to a controlled demolition. & caused me to observe that "FLT175" penetrated the WTC tower wall as would a ghost ..... ( or B movie special effects )

The facts of the events of 9/11/2001 make it abundantly clear
that there is something VERY wrong with this picture and it really doesn't matter of one is a Republican or Democrat or agnostic .... whatever ....
the facts are the facts and that is what matters.

There were no bombs. There were no thermite reactions. How do you reconcile these two facts with your 'controlled demolition' theory?

 

[Skylar]

I invite you to read the NIST investigation, the most comprehensive ever done on the collapse of WTC 7.

Yeah, it only took them several years after the fact to acknowledge that it happened.

Horse shit ... but that seems to be your only play.

You're correct. My bd. So many bad reports and fraud. It was the commission report that omitted wtc7 entirely.
NIST just made huge errors in its reports and supposed scientific investigation. Here is the latest white paper on NIST failures over wtc7.

8216 Official 8217 NIST Report Shattered by Architects Engineers for 9 11 Truth White Paper The Millennium Report

Oh....okay. So all that horseshit about ignoring the NIST because they refused to acknowledge that WTC 7 collapsed, all the inane babble about 'emotional fallacies', that was all blithering nonsense? The NIST *did* cite the WTC 7 collapse?

Huh. So what's your next excuse for ignoring anything that doesn't ape what you want to believe?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

NIST says the fires started by that jet fuel absolutely were a factor. You have the right to make up your own "mind" ... not your own facts and as already mentioned, WTC7 was severely damaged by "falling chunks of large buildings."

No, it does not.

About the NIST World Trade Center Disaster Investigation
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Objective 1: Determine why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed following the initial impacts of the aircraft.

• The two aircraft hit the towers at high speed and did considerable damage to principal structural components (core columns, floors, and perimeter columns) that were directly impacted by the aircraft or associated debris. However, the towers withstood the impacts and would have remained standing were it not for the dislodged insulation (fireproofing) and the subsequent multi-floor fires. The robustness of the perimeter frame-tube system and the large size of the buildings helped the towers withstand the impact. The structural system redistributed loads from places of aircraft impact, avoiding larger scale damage upon impact. The hat truss, a feature atop each tower which was intended to support a television antenna, prevented earlier collapse of the building core. In each tower, a different combination of impact damage and heat-weakened structural components contributed to the abrupt structural collapse.
• In WTC 1, the fires weakened the core columns and caused the floors on the south side of the building to sag. The floors pulled the heated south perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as columns on the south wall buckled. The top section of the building tilted to the south and began its descent. The time from aircraft impact to collapse initiation was largely determined by how long it took for the fires to weaken the building core and to reach the south side of the building and weaken the perimeter columns and floors.
• In WTC 2, the core was damaged severely at the southeast corner and was restrained by the east and south walls via the hat truss and the floors. The steady burning fires on the east side of the building caused the floors there to sag. The floors pulled the heated east perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as columns on the east wall buckled. The top section of the building tilted to the east and to the south and began its descent. The time from aircraft impact to collapse initiation was largely determined by the time for the fires to weaken the perimeter columns and floor assemblies on the east and the south sides of the building. WTC2 collapsed more quickly than WTC 1 because there was more aircraft damage to the building core, including one of the heavily loaded corner columns, and there were early and persistent fires on the east side of the building, where the aircraft had extensively dislodged insulation from the structural steel.
• The WTC towers likely would not have collapsed under the combined effects of aircraft impact damage and the extensive, multi-floor fires that were encountered on September11, 2001, if the thermal insulation had not been widely dislodged or had been only minimally dislodged by aircraft impact.
• In the absence of structural and insulation damage, a conventional fire substantially similar to or less intense than the fires encountered on September 11, 2001, likely would not have led to the collapse of a WTC tower.
• NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to September 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly showed that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward, until the dust clouds obscured the view.

OK? Your turn.

That doesn't even mention wtc7.

Why would it? We're talking about the jet-fuel fires and your claim that NIST said the fuel was not a factor, remember?

We were talking about wtc7's collapse. Which you said was hit by jet fuel. It wasn't. Do try to keep up, or bow out.

 

[Skylar]

pathological hatred of government,

Ya, right, a pathological hatred of government
caused me to observe that the fall of WTC7 matches up perfectly to a controlled demolition. & caused me to observe that "FLT175" penetrated the WTC tower wall as would a ghost ..... ( or B movie special effects )

The facts of the events of 9/11/2001 make it abundantly clear
that there is something VERY wrong with this picture and it really doesn't matter of one is a Republican or Democrat or agnostic .... whatever ....
the facts are the facts and that is what matters.

Political affiliation or religious beliefs absolutely do not figure into the equation but one's mental stability certainly does.
The fact is the collapse of the towers and WTC7 matches up perfectly to a traumatic impact, chaotic fires fueled by tens of thousands of jet fuel and falling chunks of large buildings and, not surprisingly, that's EXACTLY what happened on 9/11.

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

It was however, hit by massive pieces of WTC 1 that carved huge holes in the building and set fires that burned uncontrolled for most of the day.

Which, of course, you know. Which, of course, you really hope we don't.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I invite you to read the NIST investigation, the most comprehensive ever done on the collapse of WTC 7.

Yeah, it only took them several years after the fact to acknowledge that it happened.

Horse shit ... but that seems to be your only play.

You're correct. My bd. So many bad reports and fraud. It was the commission report that omitted wtc7 entirely.
NIST just made huge errors in its reports and supposed scientific investigation. Here is the latest white paper on NIST failures over wtc7.

8216 Official 8217 NIST Report Shattered by Architects Engineers for 9 11 Truth White Paper The Millennium Report

Oh....okay. So all that horseshit about ignoring the NIST because they refused to acknowledge that WTC 7 collapsed, all the inane babble about 'emotional fallacies', that was all blithering nonsense? The NIST *did* cite the WTC 7 collapse?

Huh. So what's your next excuse for ignoring anything that doesn't ape what you want to believe?

Oh, no. You still used appeal to emotion. Now you're trying to say you understand what i believe, but you dont. I simply got confused due to all the horse shit studies and reports over this pile of shit of an event.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

pathological hatred of government,

Ya, right, a pathological hatred of government
caused me to observe that the fall of WTC7 matches up perfectly to a controlled demolition. & caused me to observe that "FLT175" penetrated the WTC tower wall as would a ghost ..... ( or B movie special effects )

The facts of the events of 9/11/2001 make it abundantly clear
that there is something VERY wrong with this picture and it really doesn't matter of one is a Republican or Democrat or agnostic .... whatever ....
the facts are the facts and that is what matters.

Political affiliation or religious beliefs absolutely do not figure into the equation but one's mental stability certainly does.
The fact is the collapse of the towers and WTC7 matches up perfectly to a traumatic impact, chaotic fires fueled by tens of thousands of jet fuel and falling chunks of large buildings and, not surprisingly, that's EXACTLY what happened on 9/11.

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

It was however, hit by massive pieces of WTC 1 that carved huge holes in the building and set fires that burned uncontrolled for most of the day.

Which, of course, you know. Which, of course, you really hope we don't.

Not according to NIST final report. Nor the actual evidence at hand. But who really cares about any of that? First NIST denies any free fall speed, then finally laments after being shown they are wrong. Then they just whistle passed the graveyard on it.

 

[daws101]

pathological hatred of government,

Ya, right, a pathological hatred of government
caused me to observe that the fall of WTC7 matches up perfectly to a controlled demolition. & caused me to observe that "FLT175" penetrated the WTC tower wall as would a ghost ..... ( or B movie special effects )

The facts of the events of 9/11/2001 make it abundantly clear
that there is something VERY wrong with this picture and it really doesn't matter of one is a Republican or Democrat or agnostic .... whatever ....
the facts are the facts and that is what matters.

Political affiliation or religious beliefs absolutely do not figure into the equation but one's mental stability certainly does.
The fact is the collapse of the towers and WTC7 matches up perfectly to a traumatic impact, chaotic fires fueled by tens of thousands of jet fuel and falling chunks of large buildings and, not surprisingly, that's EXACTLY what happened on 9/11.

wtc7 wasn't hit by jets or jet fuel. NIST even claims the diesel fuel wasn't a factor in the building's global collapse.

It was however, hit by massive pieces of WTC 1 that carved huge holes in the building and set fires that burned uncontrolled for most of the day.

Which, of course, you know. Which, of course, you really hope we don't.

Not according to NIST final report. Nor the actual evidence at hand. But who really cares about any of that? First NIST denies any free fall speed, then finally laments after being shown they are wrong. Then they just whistle passed the graveyard on it.

yes they did .why? because it is meaningless.