WTC-7 Was A Controlled Demolition Inside Job

[eots]

so all you have is the same old opinions. Got it. You have no physical evidence to disprove the official physical evidence. That is what we thought.

nist has no evidence of its theory except computer simulations by their own admission

 

[Hollybaere]

What, no comments Hollybaere?



One other thing I forgot to mention. Do you see Terral's photo he annotated with all the white text boxes? He also points to a few beam ends and asks "Where is any melting by fire?"?!?!?!?!

Really?!?!?!? He claims that there are thermite signatures everywhere for WTC7, yet turns around in the same photo and points out that there is neither burn marks from fire or any melting!!!!!

This is outstanding. He debunks his own theory right in front of your eyes and you want to defend him!

Wow.

There was no melting from any fire because the heat created from the fires were NOT HOT ENOUGH to melt steel as claimed in the 911 Commission Report and the NIST study.

You cannot deny the wittnesses who actually HEARD and SAW explosions in all 3 buildings. In fact I have even posted videos where you can hear the explosions.

You really need to read Dr, Steven Jones' study.

Read this: http://www.journalof911studies.com/...rldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf

Thermite or Thermate cut apart, not melted the steel beams.

You also might want to take a look at this: World Trade Center Employee Discusses pre 9-11 Power Downs | 9-11 News | World for 9-11 Truth | W9T.org

It certainly explains how the charges could have been placed without anyone noticing.

Also, can you explain how 19 bumbling "hijackers" who could not even fly small single engine planes could perform feats with Jumbo Jets that even EXPERIENCED pilots could not duplicate?

 

[SFC Ollie]

so all you have is the same old opinions. Got it. You have no physical evidence to disprove the official physical evidence. That is what we thought.

nist has no evidence of its theory except computer simulations by their own admission

You ignore so much....... you really need to get over that lie.

"Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. "

Reviewed tens of thousands of documents.
Interviewed more than a thousand people.
Reviewed 7000 segments of video footage
Reviewed 7000 photographs.
Analyzed 236 pieces of steel.
Performed laboratory tests.
And Sophisticated computer simulations.


And all Eots will admit to is the simulations. In fact eots, don't you make the claim that they ignore testimony? Is that before or after they didn't do any interviews?

 

[ohio_golfer]

You also might want to take a look at this: World Trade Center Employee Discusses pre 9-11 Power Downs | 9-11 News | World for 9-11 Truth | W9T.org

It certainly explains how the charges could have been placed without anyone noticing.

Even if any of that was true, where are the eyewitness accounts of "power downs" in WTC1 and WTC7?

And are you seriously suggesting an entire skyscraper could be rigged for demolition in 36 hours WITHOUT leaving any evidence for people to see the following days?

Of course those simple questions never came up in any of your conversations.

 

[ohio_golfer]

Also, can you explain how 19 bumbling "hijackers" who could not even fly small single engine planes could perform feats with Jumbo Jets that even EXPERIENCED pilots could not duplicate?

First, they didn't perform any take-offs.

And second, they didn't perform any landings.

<as a matter of fact, they all crashed>

 

[eots]

so all you have is the same old opinions. Got it. You have no physical evidence to disprove the official physical evidence. That is what we thought.

nist has no evidence of its theory except computer simulations by their own admission

You ignore so much....... you really need to get over that lie.

"Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse. "

Reviewed tens of thousands of documents.
Interviewed more than a thousand people.
Reviewed 7000 segments of video footage
Reviewed 7000 photographs.
Analyzed 236 pieces of steel.
Performed laboratory tests.
And Sophisticated computer simulations.


And all Eots will admit to is the simulations. In fact eots, don't you make the claim that they ignore testimony? Is that before or after they didn't do any interviews?

263 pieces of steel almost all from wtc 1 and 2 which reveled nothing in these is the only thing remotely close to physical evidence all the rest is just blah blah blah like writing a resume...segments of video footage ..they are counting the frames to make it seem substantial !! but it is all the videos we have all seen..same with the still photos..the interviewed people..but then omitted testimony that contradicted their theory.. revived documents ??
all they have to back their claims is a flawed computer simulation the investigation is junk science and does not explain these collapses

 

[eots]

Your entire investigation included no physical evidence. How can you be so sure you know what happened?

the NIST investigation of WTC 7 is based on a huge amount of data. These data come from extensive research, interviews, and studies of the building, including audio and video recordings of the collapse. Rigorous, state-of-the-art computer methods were designed to study and model the building's collapse. These validated computer models produced a collapse sequence that was confirmed by observations of what actually occurred. In addition to using its in-house expertise, NIST relied upon private sector technical experts; accumulated copious documents, photographs and videos of this disaster; conducted first-person interviews of building occupants and emergency responders; analyzed the evacuation and emergency response operations in and around WTC 7; performed computer simulations of the behavior of WTC 7 on Sept. 11, 2001, and combined the knowledge gained into a probable collapse sequence.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

 

[eots]

Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have. Why hasn't NIST declared that this spoliation of the steel was a gross error?

OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

 

[eots]

Also, can you explain how 19 bumbling "hijackers" who could not even fly small single engine planes could perform feats with Jumbo Jets that even EXPERIENCED pilots could not duplicate?

First, they didn't perform any take-offs.

And second, they didn't perform any landings.

<as a matter of fact, they all crashed>

dont be stupid the made highly skilled maneuverer at incredible speeds by all accounts

 

[ohio_golfer]

Also, can you explain how 19 bumbling "hijackers" who could not even fly small single engine planes could perform feats with Jumbo Jets that even EXPERIENCED pilots could not duplicate?

First, they didn't perform any take-offs.

And second, they didn't perform any landings.

<as a matter of fact, they all crashed>

dont be stupid the made highly skilled maneuverer at incredible speeds by all accounts

You can't help but be stupid, but I bet you could pull off those same maneuvers. If you haven't tried, you aren't honest by saying they were "highly skilled" maneuvers.

C'mon man, give it a the good old college try. Fly a plane into a building to prove your point.

 

[eots]

First, they didn't perform any take-offs.

And second, they didn't perform any landings.

<as a matter of fact, they all crashed>

dont be stupid the made highly skilled maneuverer at incredible speeds by all accounts

You can't help but be stupid, but I bet you could pull off those same maneuvers. If you haven't tried, you aren't honest by saying they were "highly skilled" maneuvers.

C'mon man, give it a the good old college try. Fly a plane into a building to prove your point.

I dont need to..I have the expert opinion of top level aviation personal ,Apollo astronauts, , NORAD tac directors.. military and civilian air crash investigators
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

 

[ohio_golfer]

I dont need to..I have the expert opinion of top level aviation personal ,Apollo astronauts, , NORAD tac directors.. military and civilian air crash investigators
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

Seriously? Their argument is there is no evidence Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.

ALL the evidence (physical, recorded, eye witness, etc) points to Flight 77 being crashed into the Pentagon, but those morons at PatriotsQuestion911.com aren't convinced? Who gives a shit.

No wonder nobody takes you serious.

 

[Fizz]

dont be stupid the made highly skilled maneuverer at incredible speeds by all accounts

You can't help but be stupid, but I bet you could pull off those same maneuvers. If you haven't tried, you aren't honest by saying they were "highly skilled" maneuvers.

C'mon man, give it a the good old college try. Fly a plane into a building to prove your point.

I dont need to..I have the expert opinion of top level aviation personal ,Apollo astronauts, , NORAD tac directors.. military and civilian air crash investigators
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

The website does not represent any organization and it should be made clear that none of these individuals are affiliated with this website.

you gotta laugh when the website is bragging about how many people belong to twoofer groups and yet that represents only .001% of the population of the usa.

 

[Gamolon]

There was no melting from any fire because the heat created from the fires were NOT HOT ENOUGH to melt steel as claimed in the 911 Commission Report and the NIST study.

Do you understand what you are arguing? You asked me to give you points as to what was in error in Terral's WTC7 theory.

He says that his annotated photo shows NO SIGNS OF MELTING OR BURNS on the columns, yet he says THERMITE signatures are everywhere and that the columns of WTC7 were cut with thermite.

Do you understand yet?

I'll spell it out for you. How can you say that thermite was used to cut the beams and then turn around in the same photo and admit that there are no burns marks or melting ON THE SAME BEAMS THAT WERE SUPPOSEDLY CUT BY THERMITE?!?!?!

I mean for crying out loud, here is a photo that Terral uses to show supposed thermite residue on columns!!!!!

Do you understand yet?

 

[Gamolon]

What happened to discussing Terral's mistakes in his WTC7 theory? You asked me to make a point by point post of what I found and address only one of them? Then switch the topic around to the other towers?


Ok then.

Do explosions PROVE that there were explosives used? If someone says a tornado sounded like a frieght train coming through their yard, does that mean there was actually a fright train?

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf[/url]

Thermite or Thermate cut apart, not melted the steel beams.

No, maybe you need to keep up with his information. Do you know that he now suspects that thermite was used only as a FUSE for conventional explosives?

You also might want to take a look at this: World Trade Center Employee Discusses pre 9-11 Power Downs | 9-11 News | World for 9-11 Truth | W9T.org

It certainly explains how the charges could have been placed without anyone noticing.

Also, can you explain how 19 bumbling "hijackers" who could not even fly small single engine planes could perform feats with Jumbo Jets that even EXPERIENCED pilots could not duplicate?

First, you need to explain how explosions have anything to do with thermite. Thermite BURNS, it does not explode. There are many things that explode in a fire.

True story.

 

[Fizz]

dont be stupid the made highly skilled maneuverer at incredible speeds by all accounts

and CRASHED!!

 

[SFC Ollie]

Truther rule number one: When truth prevails, Ignore it.

 

[eots]

Truther rule number one: When truth prevails, Ignore it.

debwunker rule number one make nonspecific empty statements....so.what truth is being ignored lil Ollie ?

 

[eots]

I dont need to..I have the expert opinion of top level aviation personal ,Apollo astronauts, , NORAD tac directors.. military and civilian air crash investigators
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

Seriously? Their argument is there is no evidence Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.

ALL the evidence (physical, recorded, eye witness, etc) points to Flight 77 being crashed into the Pentagon, but those morons at PatriotsQuestion911.com aren't convinced? Who gives a shit.

No wonder nobody takes you serious.

really and you speak for everyone now..in your deluded state and we were talking about the flight maneuver required to fly these planes into their targets why are you changing topic now??

 

[Jos]

I dont need to..I have the expert opinion of top level aviation personal ,Apollo astronauts, , NORAD tac directors.. military and civilian air crash investigators
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

Seriously? Their argument is there is no evidence Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon.

ALL the evidence (physical, recorded, eye witness, etc) points to Flight 77 being crashed into the Pentagon, but those morons at PatriotsQuestion911.com aren't convinced? Who gives a shit.

No wonder nobody takes you serious.

really and you speak for everyone now..in your deluded state and we were talking about the flight maneuver required to fly these planes into their targets why are you changing topic now??

Astute observers of history are aware that for every notable event there will usually be at least one ,often several wild conspiracy theories which spring up around it. “The CIA killed Hendrix”; “the Pope had John Lennon murdered”; “Hitler was half Werewolf”; “Space aliens replaced Nixon with a clone,” etc, etc. The bigger the event, the more ridiculous and more numerous are the fanciful rantings which circulate in relation to it.

So its hardly surprising that the events of Sept. 11, 2001, have spawned their fair share of these ludicrous fairy tales. And as always, there is -- sadly -- a small but gullible percentage of the population eager to lap up these tall tales, regardless of facts or rational analysis.

One of the wilder stories circulating about Sept 11 (and one that has attracted something of a cult following amongst conspiracy buffs) is that it was carried out by 19 fanatical Arab hijackers, masterminded by an evil genius named Osama bin Laden, with no apparent motivation other than that they “hate our freedoms.”

Never a group of people to be bothered by facts, the perpetrators of this cartoon fantasy have constructed an elaborately woven web of delusions and unsubstantiated hearsay in order to promote this garbage across the Internet and the media to the extent that a number of otherwise rational people have actually fallen under its spell.

read more here
Idaho Observer: The looniest of all 9/11 conspiracy theories