Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Of course you run from that since it destroys your entire hallucination. You've offered up two different ways the buildings could have been brought down in a controlled demolition. Either with thermite or with explosives; and you vacillate between the two, however you find it convenient.What I am attempting to do is discuss the known evidence.
The fact of the way the WTC7 fell, is plenty of evidence that this was NOT a single point of failure initiated collapse event.
you can prove neither because neither were used.
you can prove neither because neither were used.
The fact that WTC7 descended in the manner that it did ( that is free-fall acceleration + keeping its shape as it fell straight down ) is proof plenty, but there are people who simply refuse to accept the facts here.
false. you made that bogus conclusion with no evidence to support it.you can prove neither because neither were used.
The fact that WTC7 descended in the manner that it did ( that is free-fall acceleration + keeping its shape as it fell straight down ) is proof plenty, but there are people who simply refuse to accept the facts here.
you can prove neither because neither were used.
The fact that WTC7 descended in the manner that it did ( that is free-fall acceleration + keeping its shape as it fell straight down ) is proof plenty, but there are people who simply refuse to accept the facts here.
You mean like those who refuse to accept the fact that 2 passenger jets slammed into the Towers on 9/11? You mean those kind of facts?
"How" it fell is of minor consequence in this discussion since no one has ever seen a 110 story office building collapse before in the entire history of mankind and therefore, no one can say it fell "incorrectly" unless brought down in a controlled demolition.you can prove neither because neither were used.
The fact that WTC7 descended in the manner that it did ( that is free-fall acceleration + keeping its shape as it fell straight down ) is proof plenty, but there are people who simply refuse to accept the facts here.
north face met no resistance FOR 2.25 SEC
that is not proof of cause ...
That is complete bullshit since it ignores the structural damage done to the building when the twin tower fell on it and ignores the damage done to the building when the interior collapsed about 7 seconds prior to the exterior.When weighing the two hypotheses against the observed and agreed upon occurrence of freefall, only one of them could possibly account for the requisite absence of resistance from more than 8 floors worth of both internal and external building materials. The fact that the other hypothesis happens to be the officially authorized one is no reason for any reasonable person to accept it at the expense of his or her faith in the laws of physics. In fact, according to the widely accepted determinants of delusional thought processes, those who've apparently done just that could rightfully be characterized as 'clinically delusional', if not "batshit insane".
That is complete bullshit since it ignores the structural damage done to the building when the twin tower fell on it and ignores the damage done to the building when the interior collapsed about 7 seconds prior to the exterior. ...When weighing the two hypotheses against the observed and agreed upon occurrence of freefall, only one of them could possibly account for the requisite absence of resistance from more than 8 floors worth of both internal and external building materials. The fact that the other hypothesis happens to be the officially authorized one is no reason for any reasonable person to accept it at the expense of his or her faith in the laws of physics. In fact, according to the widely accepted determinants of delusional thought processes, those who've apparently done just that could rightfully be characterized as 'clinically delusional', if not "batshit insane".
Faun said:...If there is no evidence of a controlled demolition, whether by explosives or thermite, then one has to be batshit insane to cling to the delusion it was a controlled demolition nonetheless. ...
Faun said:...Explosives are loud and produce smoke; neither of which occurred prior to the collapse of any of the buildings. ...[emphasis Capstone's]
Faun said:...Thermite is brilliantly bright; there was only one spot of molten aluminum among 270 stories of the 3 buildings, which was most likely from the plane. Other than that, there were no bright flashes just before any of the buildings fell.
Explosions were both reported by many eyewitnesses and inadvertantly recorded on a number of videos throughout the day, clear indications that some of the buildings' crucial support columns had been weakened or severed by explosives in advance of the interior ignitions of the thermate cutter charges, which were most likely heavily clouded by dust and debris, simply by virtue of an inward-facing placement M.O.
Explosions were both reported by many eyewitnesses and inadvertantly recorded on a number of videos throughout the day, clear indications that some of the buildings' crucial support columns had been weakened or severed by explosives in advance of the interior ignitions of the thermate cutter charges, which were most likely heavily clouded by dust and debris, simply by virtue of an inward-facing placement M.O.
Really? So now you are saying there were both thermite charges AND general explosives with the explosives set to go off before the thermite and all to happen in the context of the jet impact and ensuing chaotic fires? And you wonder why so many have abandoned you and the "Truther" Movement?
Explosions were both reported by many eyewitnesses and inadvertantly recorded on a number of videos throughout the day, clear indications that some of the buildings' crucial support columns had been weakened or severed by explosives in advance of the interior ignitions of the thermate cutter charges, which were most likely heavily clouded by dust and debris, simply by virtue of an inward-facing placement M.O.
Really? So now you are saying there were both thermite charges AND general explosives with the explosives set to go off before the thermite and all to happen in the context of the jet impact and ensuing chaotic fires? And you wonder why so many have abandoned you and the "Truther" Movement?
Since when is the use of explosives and incendiaries a mutually exclusive proposition for a single demolition event, particularly when the ignition temp. of the incendiary in question is sufficiently above any temperatures that might be reached as a result of the explosives?
As I've pointed out on numerous occasions, careful placement in accordance to predetermined impact zones that could have later been ensured by precision RC guidance of the aircraft/drones, along with the high ignition temps mentioned above, would have circumvented any of the possible problems you've so desperately clung to as means to belittle the CD hypothesis.
Your overused bag of tricks isn't nearly as effectiveb as it used to be, Sayit. I know I'm not the only one on this board who's seen the same ol' crap from you so often that it just rings hollow.
It's no lie. The explosions that I'm talking about are explosions brought about by a controlled demolition. Such explosions are not set off sporadically over many hours; but simultaneously within seconds of a building's collapse.That is complete bullshit since it ignores the structural damage done to the building when the twin tower fell on it and ignores the damage done to the building when the interior collapsed about 7 seconds prior to the exterior. ...When weighing the two hypotheses against the observed and agreed upon occurrence of freefall, only one of them could possibly account for the requisite absence of resistance from more than 8 floors worth of both internal and external building materials. The fact that the other hypothesis happens to be the officially authorized one is no reason for any reasonable person to accept it at the expense of his or her faith in the laws of physics. In fact, according to the widely accepted determinants of delusional thought processes, those who've apparently done just that could rightfully be characterized as 'clinically delusional', if not "batshit insane".
What's "complete bullshit" is your apparent disregard even for the aspects of NIST's explanation that don't fit your delusion.
Quoting NIST:
"The debris from WTC 1 caused structural damage to the southwest region of WTC 7—severing seven exterior columns—but this structural damage did not initiate the collapse. The fires initiated by the debris, rather than the structural damage that resulted from the impacts, initiated the building's collapse after the fires grew and spread to the northeast region after several hours." -- FAQs - NIST WTC 7 Investigation
Apart from the concession that the exterior damage played no role in the initiation of the collapse (beyond igniting the office fires), the question, as to how 7 severed exterior columns on the building's "southwest region" could account for the symmetrical 105 ft. freefall of the building's exterior "north face", still looms large and unanswered.
Regarding any external damage that could have possibly been caused by the wholesale collapse of the building's internal supports, the likelihood that it could have naturally occurred in the manner required to explain the symmetry of the observed "collapse"...is close enough to zilch to be discounted at the outset.
Faun said:...If there is no evidence of a controlled demolition, whether by explosives or thermite, then one has to be batshit insane to cling to the delusion it was a controlled demolition nonetheless. ...
You could try to repeat that into infinity, and the effort would have no effect on the reality of the situation, namely that 3 independent studies confirmed the presence of physical materials in the WTC dust that cannot be explained by any means other than the use of pyrotechnics/incendiaries.
Faun said:...Explosives are loud and produce smoke; neither of which occurred prior to the collapse of any of the buildings. ...[emphasis Capstone's]
That's a bald-faced lie, and I think you know it.
Explosions were both reported by many eyewitnesses and inadvertantly recorded on a number of videos throughout the day, clear indications that some of the buildings' crucial support columns had been weakened or severed by explosives in advance of the interior ignitions of the thermate cutter charges, which were most likely heavily clouded by dust and debris, simply by virtue of an inward-facing placement M.O.
Faun said:...Thermite is brilliantly bright; there was only one spot of molten aluminum among 270 stories of the 3 buildings, which was most likely from the plane. Other than that, there were no bright flashes just before any of the buildings fell.
Since the thermitic reactions could have been heavily clouded as I've described, the perceived deficiency of visible flashes during the "collapses" is entirely moot.
The pools and flowing streams of molten metals that were discovered at the bottom of all three debris piles, along with the sporadic fires that burned for several weeks in places strongly indicative of the prospect that the fires had their own self-contained oxygen supplies, ...not so moot.
There's no evidence such [cutting] devices existed, there's no evidence any were used.
There are pictures of neatly cut steel, and people who allege that said pix are of steel cut during the clean up operation, HOWEVER, where is the DOCUMENTATION that is the statements from specific photographers who will certify the time/date & location for any given pix?
Do you have any documentation that the pix were taken before the clean up? That they came down in that condition? Any evidence of same? Nothing? Does it make sense that any photographer was allowed or even wanted to climb into that mess before the clean-up peeps?
There are pictures of neatly cut steel, and people who allege that said pix are of steel cut during the clean up operation, HOWEVER, where is the DOCUMENTATION that is the statements from specific photographers who will certify the time/date & location for any given pix?
For that matter, did the FBI, NYPD, or? take documentary pix and if so where are these pictures?
The most poorly documented disaster in history!
There are pictures of neatly cut steel, and people who allege that said pix are of steel cut during the clean up operation, HOWEVER, where is the DOCUMENTATION that is the statements from specific photographers who will certify the time/date & location for any given pix?
Do you have any documentation that the pix were taken before the clean up? That they came down in that condition? Any evidence of same? Nothing? Does it make sense that any photographer was allowed or even wanted to climb into that mess before the clean-up peeps?
Given the fact that documentary photographers have worked in places such as combat zones during various wars, I see no reason at all for shying away from shooting pix of ground zero immediately post collapse of the twin towers.
