WTC building 7

[irosie91]

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out alledgedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. There wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials. Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out allegedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. Of course, there wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials! Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

I did not see it-----HOWEVER----in order to determine velocity of falling stuff------like a part of a wall-----
one would have to follow a POINT on the wall over time-------and measure distance it fell. distance/time =
velocity. (see? I read the first page) The building was struck with HEAVY falling debris and subject to
a hot shot energy wave when buiding one and two collapsed. It seems logical to me that large chunks
of the façade could have been dislodged -------and then they fell------free fall.------same story for "pulverized"
concrete found------on the ground. Somehow all the TROOOF explanations seem to leave out the fact of
two GIANT PLANES crashing into the buildings. There seems to be lots of pulverized concrete in TIBET---right now--------also "CONTROLLED DEMOLITION"???

 

[eots]

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out alledgedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. There wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials. Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out allegedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. Of course, there wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials! Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

I did not see it-----HOWEVER----in order to determine velocity of falling stuff------like a part of a wall-----
one would have to follow a POINT on the wall over time-------and measure distance it fell. distance/time =
velocity. (see? I read the first page) The building was struck with HEAVY falling debris and subject to
a hot shot energy wave when buiding one and two collapsed. It seems logical to me that large chunks
of the façade could have been dislodged -------and then they fell------free fall.------same story for "pulverized"
concrete found------on the ground. Somehow all the TROOOF explanations seem to leave out the fact of
two GIANT PLANES crashing into the buildings. There seems to be lots of pulverized concrete in TIBET---right now--------also "CONTROLLED DEMOLITION"???

no there is no pulverised concrete in tibet only explosive can create that result

 

[irosie91]

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out alledgedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. There wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials. Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out allegedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. Of course, there wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials! Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

I did not see it-----HOWEVER----in order to determine velocity of falling stuff------like a part of a wall-----
one would have to follow a POINT on the wall over time-------and measure distance it fell. distance/time =
velocity. (see? I read the first page) The building was struck with HEAVY falling debris and subject to
a hot shot energy wave when buiding one and two collapsed. It seems logical to me that large chunks
of the façade could have been dislodged -------and then they fell------free fall.------same story for "pulverized"
concrete found------on the ground. Somehow all the TROOOF explanations seem to leave out the fact of
two GIANT PLANES crashing into the buildings. There seems to be lots of pulverized concrete in TIBET---right now--------also "CONTROLLED DEMOLITION"???

no there is no pulverised concrete in tibet only explosive can create that result

really? I did not know that-------the only force that can
pulverize concrete is an explosion of the kind which is
created by a bomb. I did not know that------I have a problem in the basement of a building I own-----a wall----
which is made of cement and rock and is a supporting
wall-------has to be repaired ASAP------it is old and it is
CRUMBLING-------looks like it got pulverizedi---the cement between the rocks is getting PULVERIZED ----must have been BOMBED ------the engineer said it is a matter of some water leaks and some shifts

 

[eots]

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out alledgedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. There wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials. Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out allegedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. Of course, there wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials! Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

I did not see it-----HOWEVER----in order to determine velocity of falling stuff------like a part of a wall-----
one would have to follow a POINT on the wall over time-------and measure distance it fell. distance/time =
velocity. (see? I read the first page) The building was struck with HEAVY falling debris and subject to
a hot shot energy wave when buiding one and two collapsed. It seems logical to me that large chunks
of the façade could have been dislodged -------and then they fell------free fall.------same story for "pulverized"
concrete found------on the ground. Somehow all the TROOOF explanations seem to leave out the fact of
two GIANT PLANES crashing into the buildings. There seems to be lots of pulverized concrete in TIBET---right now--------also "CONTROLLED DEMOLITION"???

no there is no pulverised concrete in tibet only explosive can create that result

really? I did not know that-------the only force that can
pulverize concrete is an explosion of the kind which is
created by a bomb. I did not know that------I have a problem in the basement of a building I own-----a wall----
which is made of cement and rock and is a supporting
wall-------has to be repaired ASAP------it is old and it is
CRUMBLING-------looks like it got pulverizedi---the cement between the rocks is getting PULVERIZED ----must have been BOMBED ------the engineer said it is a matter of some water leaks and some shifts

right your basement is turning to dust and blowing away in a dense hot cloud...shadup

 

[irosie91]

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out alledgedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. There wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials. Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out allegedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. Of course, there wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials! Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

I did not see it-----HOWEVER----in order to determine velocity of falling stuff------like a part of a wall-----
one would have to follow a POINT on the wall over time-------and measure distance it fell. distance/time =
velocity. (see? I read the first page) The building was struck with HEAVY falling debris and subject to
a hot shot energy wave when buiding one and two collapsed. It seems logical to me that large chunks
of the façade could have been dislodged -------and then they fell------free fall.------same story for "pulverized"
concrete found------on the ground. Somehow all the TROOOF explanations seem to leave out the fact of
two GIANT PLANES crashing into the buildings. There seems to be lots of pulverized concrete in TIBET---right now--------also "CONTROLLED DEMOLITION"???

no there is no pulverised concrete in tibet only explosive can create that result

really? I did not know that-------the only force that can
pulverize concrete is an explosion of the kind which is
created by a bomb. I did not know that------I have a problem in the basement of a building I own-----a wall----
which is made of cement and rock and is a supporting
wall-------has to be repaired ASAP------it is old and it is
CRUMBLING-------looks like it got pulverizedi---the cement between the rocks is getting PULVERIZED ----must have been BOMBED ------the engineer said it is a matter of some water leaks and some shifts

right your basement is turning to dust and blowing away in a dense hot cloud...shadup

building one and two burned for more than an hour before they collapsed and a dense hot cloud emerged from the base. I did not see building 7 collapse------did a dense hot cloud of debris shoot out from the base when it did?

 

[eots]

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out alledgedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. There wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials. Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

Your cartoonish depiction fails to account for any of the materials in the exterior bearing walls themselves. Contrary to your apparent belief, the so-called "facade" wasn't suspended 8 stories up in mid-air after all of its internal support columns had been taken out allegedly by office fires. No, in line with the official story, it supposedly failed largely under its own weight, meaning the uppe portion would have pulverized the lower portion. Of course, there wouldn't be a problem with that hypothesis, if it weren't for the pesky fact that the exterior bearing walls were also composed of physical materials! Concrete doesn't pulverize concrete at freefall acceleration either, Rosie, at least not outside of Wonderland.

I did not see it-----HOWEVER----in order to determine velocity of falling stuff------like a part of a wall-----
one would have to follow a POINT on the wall over time-------and measure distance it fell. distance/time =
velocity. (see? I read the first page) The building was struck with HEAVY falling debris and subject to
a hot shot energy wave when buiding one and two collapsed. It seems logical to me that large chunks
of the façade could have been dislodged -------and then they fell------free fall.------same story for "pulverized"
concrete found------on the ground. Somehow all the TROOOF explanations seem to leave out the fact of
two GIANT PLANES crashing into the buildings. There seems to be lots of pulverized concrete in TIBET---right now--------also "CONTROLLED DEMOLITION"???

no there is no pulverised concrete in tibet only explosive can create that result

really? I did not know that-------the only force that can
pulverize concrete is an explosion of the kind which is
created by a bomb. I did not know that------I have a problem in the basement of a building I own-----a wall----
which is made of cement and rock and is a supporting
wall-------has to be repaired ASAP------it is old and it is
CRUMBLING-------looks like it got pulverizedi---the cement between the rocks is getting PULVERIZED ----must have been BOMBED ------the engineer said it is a matter of some water leaks and some shifts

right your basement is turning to dust and blowing away in a dense hot cloud...shadup

building one and two burned for more than an hour before they collapsed and a dense hot cloud emerged from the base. I did not see building 7 collapse------did a dense hot cloud of debris shoot out from the base when it did?

its not smoke it is pulverized concrete

 

[Maggdy]

for 2.5 seconds-----the CALCULATED velocity of the fall was consistent with
FREE FALL-------that's it-------eodtiot stakes his entire "philosophy" on observation and calculation of a 2.5 second interval? . sheeeeesh

Not just any "2.5 second interval" Rosie; those were 2.25 seconds during which the building's "facade" descended symmetrically for about 105 ft. against zero resistance to the downward motion. That means something on the order of 8 floors were completely removed from the path of descent, either simultaneously or in rapid enough succession to circumvent the resistance that would have otherwise been in effect. The fire-induced progressive collapse model holds no explanatory power for a single inch of that 105+ ft. freefall descent; which is why accepting NIST's explanation is tantamount to rejecting the third law of motion. The significance of that measly "2.5 second interval" can't be overstated.

LOL ---the façade fell freefall? so? it separated from the supporting structures and fell-------like a peach pit off a tower-------I AM SO DAMNED IMPRESSED. The people who fell from the windows of the WTC fell free-fall too

Remark: I can not to look all the videos, because I get this message: "The video comprise Kontor New Media Music owned material, who has blocked it in your country because the copyright"

 

[Hollie]

So does Alex Jones.

 

[Hollie]

Alex Jones says 9/11 an inside job.

 

[Hollie]

I did not see it-----HOWEVER----in order to determine velocity of falling stuff------like a part of a wall-----
one would have to follow a POINT on the wall over time-------and measure distance it fell. distance/time =
velocity. (see? I read the first page) The building was struck with HEAVY falling debris and subject to
a hot shot energy wave when buiding one and two collapsed. It seems logical to me that large chunks
of the façade could have been dislodged -------and then they fell------free fall.------same story for "pulverized"
concrete found------on the ground. Somehow all the TROOOF explanations seem to leave out the fact of
two GIANT PLANES crashing into the buildings. There seems to be lots of pulverized concrete in TIBET---right now--------also "CONTROLLED DEMOLITION"???

no there is no pulverised concrete in tibet only explosive can create that result

really? I did not know that-------the only force that can
pulverize concrete is an explosion of the kind which is
created by a bomb. I did not know that------I have a problem in the basement of a building I own-----a wall----
which is made of cement and rock and is a supporting
wall-------has to be repaired ASAP------it is old and it is
CRUMBLING-------looks like it got pulverizedi---the cement between the rocks is getting PULVERIZED ----must have been BOMBED ------the engineer said it is a matter of some water leaks and some shifts

right your basement is turning to dust and blowing away in a dense hot cloud...shadup

building one and two burned for more than an hour before they collapsed and a dense hot cloud emerged from the base. I did not see building 7 collapse------did a dense hot cloud of debris shoot out from the base when it did?

its not smoke it is pulverized concrete

It's smoke from all the thermite bombs.

 

[Maggdy]

no there is no pulverised concrete in tibet only explosive can create that result

really? I did not know that-------the only force that can
pulverize concrete is an explosion of the kind which is
created by a bomb. I did not know that------I have a problem in the basement of a building I own-----a wall----
which is made of cement and rock and is a supporting
wall-------has to be repaired ASAP------it is old and it is
CRUMBLING-------looks like it got pulverizedi---the cement between the rocks is getting PULVERIZED ----must have been BOMBED ------the engineer said it is a matter of some water leaks and some shifts

right your basement is turning to dust and blowing away in a dense hot cloud...shadup

building one and two burned for more than an hour before they collapsed and a dense hot cloud emerged from the base. I did not see building 7 collapse------did a dense hot cloud of debris shoot out from the base when it did?

its not smoke it is pulverized concrete

It's smoke from all the thermite bombs.

For me it is equivocal that there is smoke in video. The smoke coming up strongly to the sky. Mushroom of smoke up shoot in the air, vertically and not horizontally spread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WC7dpMgaWiY

 

[Capstone]

I did not see it-----HOWEVER----in order to determine velocity of falling stuff------like a part of a wall-----
one would have to follow a POINT on the wall over time-------and measure distance it fell. distance/time =
velocity. (see? I read the first page) The building was struck with HEAVY falling debris and subject to
a hot shot energy wave when buiding one and two collapsed. It seems logical to me that large chunks
of the façade could have been dislodged -------and then they fell------free fall.------same story for "pulverized"
concrete found------on the ground. ...

The structural damage sustained from fallen debris from Tower 1 was asymmetrical and limited to the west side of the south face (where only 7 exerior columns were compromised). Even according to the government's own science lackeys at NIST, beyond supposedly being the site at which the office fires were started, the structural damage itself played no role in the initiation of the collapse. Remember, NIST's multi-stage video analysis involved footage from the "north face" of the building. The notion that highly localized, asymmetrical damage to a handful of exterior columns on the other side of the building could account for the symmetrical drop of the intact bearing walls at gravitational acceleration is beyond all credulity.

...Somehow all the TROOOF explanations seem to leave out the fact of
two GIANT PLANES crashing into the buildings. There seems to be lots of pulverized concrete in TIBET---right now--------also "CONTROLLED DEMOLITION"???

No aircraft/drone struck Building 7; the fires were fuelled by office furnishings (not jet fuel or fuel oil fires); and the damage sustained from fallen debris from Tower 1 was asymmetrical and localized/limited to a handful of exterior columns on the south/west region of the building. That's all according to NIST. None of those purported facts were born in "TWOOF explanations", Rosie.

The simple fact of the matter is that the observed "collapse" (with the 2.25 seconds of freefall admitted by NIST) requires the complete removal of more than 8 stories from the path of descent, by which I mean there could have been no physical interaction between the compositional materials from those floors and the rest of the building (I.E. no crushing, bending, breaking, ETC.). So YES, "controlled demolition" is the only way that could have been done.

 

[Capstone]

Alex Jones says 9/11 an inside job.

What you're doing in this thread is not only beyond childish, it's counterproductive to your cause. Like all sources of infomation, whether mainstream or 'alternative', Alex Jones should be viewed as a potential source for both valid information and mis/disinformation. Accordingly, all of his reports should be researched and vetted prior to citing or buying into them on a personal level. Granted, not everything that has come from Infowars has been entirely credible or true; but the same could be said of much of the stuff that's been reported or put out by "more respected" sources of news and information. Those who blindly accept everything from CNN, CBS, NBC, Popular Mechanics, nist.gov, ETC. are no better than their counterparts in the alternative community. There's a healthy balance to be struck between off-the-wall and on-the-wall sources, and the responsibility for finding that balance rests squarely on the shoulders of each individual viewer/reader.

 

[Hollie]

Alex Jones says 9/11 an inside job.

What you're doing in this thread is not only beyond childish, it's counterproductive to your cause. Like all sources of infomation, whether mainstream or 'alternative', Alex Jones should be viewed as a potential source for both valid information and mis/disinformation. Accordingly, all of his reports should be researched and vetted prior to citing or buying into them on a personal level. Granted, not everything that has come from Infowars has been entirely credible or true; but the same could be said of much of the stuff that's been reported or put out by "more respected" sources of news and information. Those who blindly accept everything from CNN, CBS, NBC, Popular Mechanics, nist.gov, ETC. are no better than their counterparts in the alternative community. There's a healthy balance to be struck between off-the-wall and on-the-wall sources, and the responsibility for finding that balance rests squarely on the shoulders of each individual viewer/reader.

As I noted before, I'm just having a little fun at the expense of the more excitable conspiracy theory loons.

The fact is, there is a certain personality type that clings to conspiracy theories and the wacky conspiracies promoted by the loons in this thread are among the wackiest.

Lastly, there's nothing counterproductive about presenting the looniness of so many of the conspiracy theory promoters. The sheer lunacy of the 9/11 conspiracy cabal is ripe for ridicule.

 

[SAYIT]

I did not see it-----HOWEVER----in order to determine velocity of falling stuff------like a part of a wall-----
one would have to follow a POINT on the wall over time-------and measure distance it fell. distance/time =
velocity. (see? I read the first page) The building was struck with HEAVY falling debris and subject to
a hot shot energy wave when buiding one and two collapsed. It seems logical to me that large chunks
of the façade could have been dislodged -------and then they fell------free fall.------same story for "pulverized"
concrete found------on the ground. ...

The structural damage sustained from fallen debris from Tower 1 was asymmetrical and limited to the west side of the south face (where only 7 exerior columns were compromised). Even according to the government's own science lackeys at NIST, beyond supposedly being the site at which the office fires were started, the structural damage itself played no role in the initiation of the collapse. Remember, NIST's multi-stage video analysis involved footage from the "north face" of the building. The notion that highly localized, asymmetrical damage to a handful of exterior columns on the other side of the building could account for the symmetrical drop of the intact bearing walls at gravitational acceleration is beyond all credulity.

...Somehow all the TROOOF explanations seem to leave out the fact of
two GIANT PLANES crashing into the buildings. There seems to be lots of pulverized concrete in TIBET---right now--------also "CONTROLLED DEMOLITION"???

No aircraft/drone struck Building 7; the fires were fuelled by office furnishings (not jet fuel or fuel oil fires); and the damage sustained from fallen debris from Tower 1 was asymmetrical and localized/limited to a handful of exterior columns on the south/west region of the building. That's all according to NIST. None of those purported facts were born in "TWOOF explanations", Rosie.

The simple fact of the matter is that the observed "collapse" (with the 2.25 seconds of freefall admitted by NIST) requires the complete removal of more than 8 stories from the path of descent, by which I mean there could have been no physical interaction between the compositional materials from those floors and the rest of the building (I.E. no crushing, bending, breaking, ETC.). So YES, "controlled demolition" is the only way that could have been done.

Uh-huh ... according to any foil-hatted 9/11 CT loon. The fires started in WTC7 by large chunks of burning Tower debris caused it to collapse, just as those fires brought down the Towers. There is plenty of evidence which supports that theory and absolutely none which supports your CD theory. Try again.

 

[SAYIT]

Alex Jones says 9/11 an inside job.

What you're doing in this thread is not only beyond childish, it's counterproductive to your cause. Like all sources of infomation, whether mainstream or 'alternative', Alex Jones should be viewed as a potential source for both valid information and mis/disinformation. Accordingly, all of his reports should be researched and vetted prior to citing or buying into them on a personal level. Granted, not everything that has come from Infowars has been entirely credible or true; but the same could be said of much of the stuff that's been reported or put out by "more respected" sources of news and information. Those who blindly accept everything from CNN, CBS, NBC, Popular Mechanics, nist.gov, ETC. are no better than their counterparts in the alternative community. There's a healthy balance to be struck between off-the-wall and on-the-wall sources, and the responsibility for finding that balance rests squarely on the shoulders of each individual viewer/reader.

As I noted before, I'm just having a little fun at the expense of the more excitable conspiracy theory loons.

The fact is, there is a certain personality type that clings to conspiracy theories and the wacky conspiracies promoted by the loons in this thread are among the wackiest.

Lastly, there's nothing counterproductive about presenting the looniness of so many of the conspiracy theory promoters. The sheer lunacy of the 9/11 conspiracy cabal is ripe for ridicule.

There is far more evidence that the YouTube addicted Loony-Toon cabal actually enjoys the abuse (and perhaps lives for it) than there is for any of their foil-hatted silliness and I mean that with all due respect (or at least all the respect I can muster for them).

 

[Capstone]

As I noted before, I'm just having a little fun at the expense of the more excitable conspiracy theory loons.

The fact is, there is a certain personality type that clings to conspiracy theories and the wacky conspiracies promoted by the loons in this thread are among the wackiest. ...

The wackiest of all 9/11 conspiracy theories is the one that's been used ad nauseam over the past 13-odd years to justify western atrocities on the other side of the globe and to legislate more and more draconian "security" measures on the homefront. After all, it has the singular distinction of being the only one that requires the suspension of faith in common sense principles and the laws of physics.

...Lastly, there's nothing counterproductive about presenting the looniness of so many of the conspiracy theory promoters. The sheer lunacy of the 9/11 conspiracy cabal is ripe for ridicule.

I'm sorry, apparently I was mistaken in giving you the benefit of the doubt. You see, I thought your "cause" was the promotion of truth, to which the out-of-hand rejection of any sources or pieces of potentially legitimate information (yes, even those that don't necessarily jibe with your predetermined conclusions)...would, in fact, be counterproductive. Now that you've made it clear that you're simply out to protect your cherished delusions at all costs, or possibly something far more insidious, by offering nothing to the conversation but adolescent ridicule, I suppose your actions in this thread haven't been the least bit counterproductive to your cause after all! So, um, kudos on that.

 

[Hollie]

As I noted before, I'm just having a little fun at the expense of the more excitable conspiracy theory loons.

The fact is, there is a certain personality type that clings to conspiracy theories and the wacky conspiracies promoted by the loons in this thread are among the wackiest. ...

The wackiest of all 9/11 conspiracy theories is the one that's been used ad nauseam over the past 13-odd years to justify western atrocities on the other side of the globe and to legislate more and more draconian "security" measures on the homefront. After all, it has the singular distinction of being the only one that requires the suspension of faith in common sense principles and the laws of physics.

...Lastly, there's nothing counterproductive about presenting the looniness of so many of the conspiracy theory promoters. The sheer lunacy of the 9/11 conspiracy cabal is ripe for ridicule.

I'm sorry, apparently I was mistaken in giving you the benefit of the doubt. You see, I thought your "cause" was the promotion of truth, to which the out-of-hand rejection of any sources or pieces of potentially legitimate information (yes, even those that don't necessarily jibe with your predetermined conclusions)...would, in fact, be counterproductive. Now that you've made it clear that you're simply out to protect your cherished delusions at all costs, or possibly something far more insidious, by offering nothing to the conversation but adolescent ridicule, I suppose your actions in this thread haven't been the least bit counterproductive to your cause after all! So, um, kudos on that.

The phony melodrama does nothing to assist with promotion of conspiracy theories. Like the other rabid conspiracy theorists in this thread, you have offered nothing to support your contention that there is a vast conspiracy, conspired among a diverse array of conspirators to commit some sinister conspiracy.

You were mistaken only in requiring others to buy into your conspiracy with nothing more than, well.... nothing. You're free to post all the silly and amateurish YouTube videos that the other loons have posted. Without exception, that all gave been so carelessly edited, it's difficult to know why anyone would accept such nonsense.

 

[irosie91]

I have a theory of my own------my theory is based on that which I experienced on 9-12-01. -----after that which I experienced on 9-11-01 On 9-11-01------while getting ready to ALIGHT
the "A" train-----ie the one that runs under the WORLD TRADE CENTER at chambers street------I looked out of my window and saw a THICK PLUME of white smoke rising from the WTC building------the news on TV----a PLANE HIT THE BUILDING ------"oh" thought I-----a poor little piper cub from Teterboro airport ---------someone is dead....... ---It was fascinating sight-----then SUDDENLY a huge flash-----"SECOND PLANE" said the TV ------"terrorism" --
said hubby. "nah" thought I------"the fire jumped"-----"SECOND PLANE" insisted the TV------"oh gee" I thought "TERRORISM" "THE CITY IS UNDER
ATTACK" ---<no going to work today> ----then the rest----bodies on smashed on the ground -----the SKY BLACK etc etc. ---------I have to move out----I have things to do----I have work. -----"OH GEE----dancing on Atlantic Avenue" ------maamoul flying around. Call from relatives in Israel "they're dancing in rammaleh" -----Call from New Jersey "theyre dancing in Paterson, New Jersey. Next day back to work---------Queens, ny "da joooos did it"
da mosssad CALLED EVERY JOOO AND SAID "STAY AWAY FROM THE WTC" --------GEE----NO ONE CALLED ME-----HOW COME? ISRAEL ACTUALLY KNOWS THAT THERE IS AN ISRAELI IN MY HOUSE----AND THEY DID NOT CALL ME-------I GET MAIL FROM THEM NOW AND THEN------AND THEY DID NOT CALL ME. -------next few days------every muslim kid over the age of three----"DA JOOOS DID IT" DA MOSSAD TOLD EVERY JOOOOO" -----------almost 14 years later------the islamo Nazi scum on this board----DA MOSSAD----DA MOSSAD---DA MOSSAD------

 

[eots]

I have a theory of my own------my theory is based on that which I experienced on 9-12-01. -----after that which I experienced on 9-11-01 On 9-11-01------while getting ready to ALIGHT
the "A" train-----ie the one that runs under the WORLD TRADE CENTER at chambers street------I looked out of my window and saw a THICK PLUME of white smoke rising from the WTC building------the news on TV----a PLANE HIT THE BUILDING ------"oh" thought I-----a poor little piper cub from Teterboro airport ---------someone is dead....... ---It was fascinating sight-----then SUDDENLY a huge flash-----"SECOND PLANE" said the TV ------"terrorism" --
said hubby. "nah" thought I------"the fire jumped"-----"SECOND PLANE" insisted the TV------"oh gee" I thought "TERRORISM" "THE CITY IS UNDER
ATTACK" ---<no going to work today> ----then the rest----bodies on smashed on the ground -----the SKY BLACK etc etc. ---------I have to move out----I have things to do----I have work. -----"OH GEE----dancing on Atlantic Avenue" ------maamoul flying around. Call from relatives in Israel "they're dancing in rammaleh" -----Call from New Jersey "theyre dancing in Paterson, New Jersey. Next day back to work---------Queens, ny "da joooos did it"
da mosssad CALLED EVERY JOOO AND SAID "STAY AWAY FROM THE WTC" --------GEE----NO ONE CALLED ME-----HOW COME? ISRAEL ACTUALLY KNOWS THAT THERE IS AN ISRAELI IN MY HOUSE----AND THEY DID NOT CALL ME-------I GET MAIL FROM THEM NOW AND THEN------AND THEY DID NOT CALL ME. -------next few days------every muslim kid over the age of three----"DA JOOOS DID IT" DA MOSSAD TOLD EVERY JOOOOO" -----------almost 14 years later------the islamo Nazi scum on this board----DA MOSSAD----DA MOSSAD---DA MOSSAD------

what a freak