911 WTC 7 Silent Thermate Demolition, Debunkers Grab Your Ankles!

[Faun]

truther nuts

Your attitude is showing ..... How about a real rebuttal?

Well in all fairness, a real rebuttal requires you understand what I wrote, which the question you asked reveals you clearly don't. And if I have an "attitude" towards you, it's because you flat out refuse to answer any questions which contain answers that don't conform to your beliefs. I even watched a video at your request only to have my subsequent questions ignored. Maybe if you demonstrated you were truly here with an open mind, instead of trying to push a conspiracy you have failed repeatedly to prove, you would be greeted with less "attitude."

 

[SAYIT]

And as far as WTC1 and WTC2, they demonstrate that 100% of the skyscrapers which had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

so you are alleging that 100% of the time, flying an airplane into a skyscraper will cause the complete & total destruction of said skyscraper? .... what?

You seem to have a comprehension problem. Faun clearly and unequivocally stated that 100% of the skyscrapers which have had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.
If you still don't get it, ask someone for some help.

 

[n0spam4me]

100% of the skyscrapers which have had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

and so, it is alleged to be a sure thing, a total certainty that crashing an airliner into a skyscraper will result in complete and total destruction of said skyscraper..... "total collapse was inevitable ........ "
right, & that is the ONLY out-come allowable under what black magic?

 

[Faun]

100% of the skyscrapers which have had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

and so, it is alleged to be a sure thing, a total certainty that crashing an airliner into a skyscraper will result in complete and total destruction of said skyscraper..... "total collapse was inevitable ........ "
right, & that is the ONLY out-come allowable under what black magic?

No one alleges it to be a sure thing. But this is a perfect example of how the "truther" brain works; and this goes a long way in revealing why the truther uses the false argument that since there was never a building which collapsed due to fire, WTC 7 could not possibly have collapsed due to fire. Your brain is not wired to understand that not everything is an absolute.

You've just revealed much about how truthers think and why they can't accept that just because something hasn't happened -- doesn't mean it can't happen.

Thanks!

 

[SAYIT]

100% of the skyscrapers which have had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

and so, it is alleged to be a sure thing, a total certainty that crashing an airliner into a skyscraper will result in complete and total destruction of said skyscraper..... "total collapse was inevitable ........ "
right, & that is the ONLY out-come allowable under what black magic?

No, but it is a certainty that 100% of all skyscrapers that have been rammed by jetliners with thousands of gallons of fuel have collapsed and that officials at Ground Zero has reason to believe WTC7 was going to collapse also. How is it you can absorb so much 9/11 Internet CT "knowledge" but can't comprehend so simple a statement?
Are you by chance learning impaired? Dyslexic? Mentally challenged? A slow learner? Really, really stupid?

 

[n0spam4me]

100% of the skyscrapers which have had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

and so, it is alleged to be a sure thing, a total certainty that crashing an airliner into a skyscraper will result in complete and total destruction of said skyscraper..... "total collapse was inevitable ........ "
right, & that is the ONLY out-come allowable under what black magic?

No one alleges it to be a sure thing. But this is a perfect example of how the "truther" brain works; and this goes a long way in revealing why the truther uses the false argument that since there was never a building which collapsed due to fire, WTC 7 could not possibly have collapsed due to fire. Your brain is not wired to understand that not everything is an absolute.

You've just revealed much about how truthers think and why they can't accept that just because something hasn't happened -- doesn't mean it can't happen.

Thanks!

Not only was WTC7 destroyed, but did you notice the manner in witch it was destroyed?

 

[Faun]

100% of the skyscrapers which have had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

and so, it is alleged to be a sure thing, a total certainty that crashing an airliner into a skyscraper will result in complete and total destruction of said skyscraper..... "total collapse was inevitable ........ "
right, & that is the ONLY out-come allowable under what black magic?

No one alleges it to be a sure thing. But this is a perfect example of how the "truther" brain works; and this goes a long way in revealing why the truther uses the false argument that since there was never a building which collapsed due to fire, WTC 7 could not possibly have collapsed due to fire. Your brain is not wired to understand that not everything is an absolute.

You've just revealed much about how truthers think and why they can't accept that just because something hasn't happened -- doesn't mean it can't happen.

Thanks!

Not only was WTC7 destroyed, but did you notice the manner in witch it was destroyed?

Yes, we've exhausted this debate as well.

 

[n0spam4me]

100% of the skyscrapers which have had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

and so, it is alleged to be a sure thing, a total certainty that crashing an airliner into a skyscraper will result in complete and total destruction of said skyscraper..... "total collapse was inevitable ........ "
right, & that is the ONLY out-come allowable under what black magic?

No one alleges it to be a sure thing. But this is a perfect example of how the "truther" brain works; and this goes a long way in revealing why the truther uses the false argument that since there was never a building which collapsed due to fire, WTC 7 could not possibly have collapsed due to fire. Your brain is not wired to understand that not everything is an absolute.

You've just revealed much about how truthers think and why they can't accept that just because something hasn't happened -- doesn't mean it can't happen.

Thanks!

Not only was WTC7 destroyed, but did you notice the manner in witch it was destroyed?

Yes, we've exhausted this debate as well.

Yes, exhausted this debate, because some people refuse to recognize the significance of the manner in witch the towers & 7 fell as a valid piece of evidence.

 

[Faun]

100% of the skyscrapers which have had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

and so, it is alleged to be a sure thing, a total certainty that crashing an airliner into a skyscraper will result in complete and total destruction of said skyscraper..... "total collapse was inevitable ........ "
right, & that is the ONLY out-come allowable under what black magic?

No one alleges it to be a sure thing. But this is a perfect example of how the "truther" brain works; and this goes a long way in revealing why the truther uses the false argument that since there was never a building which collapsed due to fire, WTC 7 could not possibly have collapsed due to fire. Your brain is not wired to understand that not everything is an absolute.

You've just revealed much about how truthers think and why they can't accept that just because something hasn't happened -- doesn't mean it can't happen.

Thanks!

Not only was WTC7 destroyed, but did you notice the manner in witch it was destroyed?

Yes, we've exhausted this debate as well.

Yes, exhausted this debate, because some people refuse to recognize the significance of the manner in witch the towers & 7 fell as a valid piece of evidence.

Sure, dude.

 

[n0spam4me]

Sure, dude.

So you have no FACTS to present to support the official story?

Fact is, the opposition is out of ammo, there isn't anything to support the "collapse" because of "office fires" < words used by Dr. Sunder in presenting the final report on the "collapse" of WTC7.

Your tax dollars at work, funding total FRAUD from the NIST ( etc.... )

 

[Faun]

Sure, dude.

So you have no FACTS to present to support the official story?

Fact is, the opposition is out of ammo, there isn't anything to support the "collapse" because of "office fires" < words used by Dr. Sunder in presenting the final report on the "collapse" of WTC7.

Your tax dollars at work, funding total FRAUD from the NIST ( etc.... )

Facts have been presented to you repeatedly. You ignore them. We're beyond that now.

 

[daws101]

Sure, dude.

So you have no FACTS to present to support the official story?

Fact is, the opposition is out of ammo, there isn't anything to support the "collapse" because of "office fires" < words used by Dr. Sunder in presenting the final report on the "collapse" of WTC7.

Your tax dollars at work, funding total FRAUD from the NIST ( etc.... )

you must have short and long term memory problems.

 

[daws101]

100% of the skyscrapers which have had planes flown into them with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, have collapsed.

and so, it is alleged to be a sure thing, a total certainty that crashing an airliner into a skyscraper will result in complete and total destruction of said skyscraper..... "total collapse was inevitable ........ "
right, & that is the ONLY out-come allowable under what black magic?

 

[Faun]

Sure, dude.

So you have no FACTS to present to support the official story?

Fact is, the opposition is out of ammo, there isn't anything to support the "collapse" because of "office fires" < words used by Dr. Sunder in presenting the final report on the "collapse" of WTC7.

Your tax dollars at work, funding total FRAUD from the NIST ( etc.... )

you must have short and long term memory problems.

His name is Tom.

 

[n0spam4me]

If others insist on posting rubbish, that is not my problem,
I intend to discuss the demolition of the WTC.
Note that in all three buildings, that is WTC1, 2 & 7
the "collapse" event led to the total destruction of the building,
and that the destruction proceeded without hesitation or any jolt to be seen indicating energy transfer. The rubble from above completely and totally destroyed each and ever level of the building, not just the floors but the outside wall columns + the core, Damn good trick, don't you think?

 

[daws101]

If others insist on posting rubbish, that is not my problem,
I intend to discuss the demolition of the WTC.
Note that in all three buildings, that is WTC1, 2 & 7
the "collapse" event led to the total destruction of the building,
and that the destruction proceeded without hesitation or any jolt to be seen indicating energy transfer. The rubble from above completely and totally destroyed each and ever level of the building, not just the floors but the outside wall columns + the core, Damn good trick, don't you think?

says the queen of piling it high and deep.

 

[n0spam4me]

Question about the Kader Toy Factory, were all of those toys UL approved fire rated materials? Because it can be shown beyond any doubt that the Jet fuel had insufficient energy to bring down the skyscrapers and the office contents most certainly lacked the fuel value to significantly add to the heat load in the structure.
so without a fire capable of producing sufficient heat to cause total structural failure, what do you have?

 

[SAYIT]

Question about the Kader Toy Factory, were all of those toys UL approved fire rated materials? Because it can be shown beyond any doubt that the Jet fuel had insufficient energy to bring down the skyscrapers and the office contents most certainly lacked the fuel value to significantly add to the heat load in the structure.
so without a fire capable of producing sufficient heat to cause total structural failure, what do you have?

Stop! Please stop! You're killing me!
No one said the jet fuel brought down those buildings but it is well established that they started the fires that eventually did. What was in those buildings fueled the fire long after the jet fuel was spent. You knew that before you posted that "Kadar Toy Factory" BS, so what are you trying to prove now? As always you have nothing but half-truths and outright fabrications.

 

[n0spam4me]

Question about the Kader Toy Factory, were all of those toys UL approved fire rated materials? Because it can be shown beyond any doubt that the Jet fuel had insufficient energy to bring down the skyscrapers and the office contents most certainly lacked the fuel value to significantly add to the heat load in the structure.
so without a fire capable of producing sufficient heat to cause total structural failure, what do you have?

Stop! Please stop! You're killing me!
No one said the jet fuel brought down those buildings but it is well established that they started the fires that eventually did. What was in those buildings fueled the fire long after the jet fuel was spent. You knew that before you posted that "Kadar Toy Factory" BS, so what are you trying to prove now? As always you have nothing but half-truths and outright fabrications.

Note that Dr. Sunder of the NIST specified in his speech before the assembled press ... that OFFICE CONTENTS fueled the fires that brought down WTC7, now you are saying also OFFICE CONTENTS allegedly fueled the fires that destroyed WTC 1, & 2, However the only thing that could supply fuel, was the paper, because all of the desks, chairs ( etc... ) that are in cubicle-land are known to be fire resistant. The ONLY place where fires burn intensely is specific offices that have LOTS of paper. Note a pix of the earlier WTC tower fire showed shelves similar to library shelves with mass quantities of paper in the form of either books or files but my point is that fire concentrates where there is fuel, and was that fuel sufficient, and not only sufficient, but focused enough to do the job, that is the complete & total destruction of the tower(s)?

 

[SAYIT]

Question about the Kader Toy Factory, were all of those toys UL approved fire rated materials? Because it can be shown beyond any doubt that the Jet fuel had insufficient energy to bring down the skyscrapers and the office contents most certainly lacked the fuel value to significantly add to the heat load in the structure.
so without a fire capable of producing sufficient heat to cause total structural failure, what do you have?

Stop! Please stop! You're killing me!
No one said the jet fuel brought down those buildings but it is well established that they started the fires that eventually did. What was in those buildings fueled the fire long after the jet fuel was spent. You knew that before you posted that "Kadar Toy Factory" BS, so what are you trying to prove now? As always you have nothing but half-truths and outright fabrications.

Note that Dr. Sunder of the NIST specified in his speech before the assembled press ... that OFFICE CONTENTS fueled the fires that brought down WTC7, now you are saying also OFFICE CONTENTS allegedly fueled the fires that destroyed WTC 1, & 2, However the only thing that could supply fuel, was the paper, because all of the desks, chairs ( etc... ) that are in cubicle-land are known to be fire resistant...

Again you willfully resort to half-truths and disinformation. Whatever burned that day clearly burned hot enough to weaken the structures to the point of collapse. Fire resistant does not mean fire proof and you must be well aware of that. You strike me as the nomad type ... you dump your silliness on some Internet forum until there's no oxygen left and then move on to the next forum where you begin the same old tired BS all over again. Read my lips, Princess: It's O-V-E-R.
There's nothing left of the "Truther" Movement except you and the cleanup crew.