Amazing chutzpah - New 9-11 museum never mentions WTC-7!!!

[Faun]

First of all, the roof collapses about 7 seconds before the rest of the building. By design, that does not happen in a controlled demolition. That alone is a good indication that it was not a controlled demolition which brought down building 7.

.

7 seconds!!!! HAHAHA. More like 1/2 second. What outrageous lies you govt shills tell. But then, you have no choice since your position is so contrary to the facts.

Only an insane person would deny obvious visual evidence. Seems shootspeeders is a nutcase.

Here, nutcase ... again, look at the video I posted earlier. It is clearly obvious the roof begins to collapse at the 0:03 second mark while the rest of the building begins to collapse at the 10 second mark. On planet reality, 10 seconds minus 3 seconds is 7 seconds, not half a second.



So let's tally up the damage ...

a) you're a truther

b) you first denied the interior fell first, then said it did, but by design

c) now you're claiming a 7 second delay is only a half second delay

yup, more than enough evidence to dismiss shootspeeders as batshit bonkers.

 

[georgephillip]

First of all, the roof collapses about 7 seconds before the rest of the building. By design, that does not happen in a controlled demolition. That alone is a good indication that it was not a controlled demolition which brought down building 7.

.

7 seconds!!!! HAHAHA. More like 1/2 second. What outrageous lies you govt shills tell. But then, you have no choice since your position is so contrary to the facts.

Only an insane person would deny obvious visual evidence. Seems shootspeeders is a nutcase.

Here, nutcase ... again, look at the video I posted earlier. It is clearly obvious the roof begins to collapse at the 0:03 second mark while the rest of the building begins to collapse at the 10 second mark. On planet reality, 10 seconds minus 3 seconds is 7 seconds, not half a second.



So let's tally up the damage ...

a) you're a truther

b) you first denied the interior fell first, then said it did, but by design

c) now you're claiming a 7 second delay is only a half second delay

yup, more than enough evidence to dismiss shootspeeders as batshit bonkers.

Are you deliberately conflating the east penthouse with the collapse of WTC7's roof-line?
How can you look at the video you just posted and not see a controlled demolition?

 

[Faun]

"Although Building 7 was never hit by an airplane and had only isolated pockets of fires on about 10 floors, it suddenly imploded – coming down neatly, symmetrically, and completely at 5:20 p.m.

"The official story, according to NIST, is that WTC 7 collapsed due to 'normal office fires' which created a 'new phenomenon' in high-rise fires: destruction due to thermal expansion of steel beams, leading to the progressive collapse of nine floors.

"This ultimately caused the failure of column #79 – which was followed within seconds by all the rest.

"Some observers had speculated that stores of diesel fuel inside the building might have produced exceptionally intense fires leading to the unusual collapse. However, NIST has officially acknowledged that diesel fuel was not involved.

"NIST also ultimately concluded that the impact of debris from the North Tower was not a significant contributor to the collapse, although it was blamed for starting the fires.

"What NIST’s top engineers failed to explain – and often even to acknowledge – in their Final Report were the many features of the building’s destruction that are normally seen only in explosive controlled demolitions."

Building 7 Implosion: The Smoking Gun of 9/11

I hope you don't mind, but I took the liberty to highlight the bullshit in your post ... While there was one feature normally seen in a controlled demolition (that the building fell into its own footprint), you can't ignore the fact that there were also some required elements of a controlled demolition obviously missing from building 7's demise -- notably the absence of explosives being set off throughout the building in the seconds before it collapsed.

And again, you can't ignore the fact that there would have been explosions throughout the day, bringing parts of the building down sporadically, had there been explosives planted strategically with the intent of bringing the building down, due to the fires that were burning uncontrollably.

There were numerous explosions reported by first responders, and recorded by the media.
There were multiple indications of controlled demolition like the crimp in the middle of the roof line as it begins its descent, and the lateral ejections of steel beams during collapse. I don't see why you think there would have been explosions going off during the time before collapse from isolated office fires on random floors. All the controversy we discuss tells me there are good reasons for an independent investigation into WTC7, but I suspect you don't want that. Why not?

The part which baffles me is why you and I keep going in circles in regards to the explosions. Again, I posted a video with numerous actual controlled demolitions. Presumably, you watched at least some of it. It clearly demonstrates the hallmark of a controlled demolition are the series of [big] explosions a second or two before the building comes down. There were no such explosions seen or heard coming from building 7 a second or two before it collapsed. The explosions you're talking about, the ones picked up by the media, occurred sporadically throughout the 7 hours from when the tower first pounded it with debris until it finally fell.

Also, regarding the part of your post which I highlighted ... if you don't think it was fires which set off those sporadic explosions throughout that 7 hour period, what do you think it was that set them off?

And lastly, your suspicions are wrong. I don't care if it's investigated another 100 times. I have complete confidence that every investigation will result with the same rational conclusions ... a plane was flown into the north tower, a second plane was flown into the south tower, a third plane was flown into the Pentagon, a 4th plane was heroically crashed in PA by the efforts of the passengers, and building #7 collapsed due to the extensive damage caused by being pounded by debris from a falling 110 story building combined with fires raging uncontrollably for 7 hours.

 

[Faun]

7 seconds!!!! HAHAHA. More like 1/2 second. What outrageous lies you govt shills tell. But then, you have no choice since your position is so contrary to the facts.

Only an insane person would deny obvious visual evidence. Seems shootspeeders is a nutcase.

Here, nutcase ... again, look at the video I posted earlier. It is clearly obvious the roof begins to collapse at the 0:03 second mark while the rest of the building begins to collapse at the 10 second mark. On planet reality, 10 seconds minus 3 seconds is 7 seconds, not half a second.



So let's tally up the damage ...

a) you're a truther

b) you first denied the interior fell first, then said it did, but by design

c) now you're claiming a 7 second delay is only a half second delay

yup, more than enough evidence to dismiss shootspeeders as batshit bonkers.

Are you deliberately conflating the east penthouse with the collapse of WTC7's roof-line?
How can you look at the video you just posted and not see a controlled demolition?

Not conflating, pointing out those 2 events occurred 7 seconds apart. Something not seen in a controlled demolition.

 

[georgephillip]

I hope you don't mind, but I took the liberty to highlight the bullshit in your post ... While there was one feature normally seen in a controlled demolition (that the building fell into its own footprint), you can't ignore the fact that there were also some required elements of a controlled demolition obviously missing from building 7's demise -- notably the absence of explosives being set off throughout the building in the seconds before it collapsed.

And again, you can't ignore the fact that there would have been explosions throughout the day, bringing parts of the building down sporadically, had there been explosives planted strategically with the intent of bringing the building down, due to the fires that were burning uncontrollably.

There were numerous explosions reported by first responders, and recorded by the media.
There were multiple indications of controlled demolition like the crimp in the middle of the roof line as it begins its descent, and the lateral ejections of steel beams during collapse. I don't see why you think there would have been explosions going off during the time before collapse from isolated office fires on random floors. All the controversy we discuss tells me there are good reasons for an independent investigation into WTC7, but I suspect you don't want that. Why not?

The part which baffles me is why you and I keep going in circles in regards to the explosions. Again, I posted a video with numerous actual controlled demolitions. Presumably, you watched at least some of it. It clearly demonstrates the hallmark of a controlled demolition are the series of [big] explosions a second or two before the building comes down. There were no such explosions seen or heard coming from building 7 a second or two before it collapsed. The explosions you're talking about, the ones picked up by the media, occurred sporadically throughout the 7 hours from when the tower first pounded it with debris until it finally fell.

Also, regarding the part of your post which I highlighted ... if you don't think it was fires which set off those sporadic explosions throughout that 7 hour period, what do you think it was that set them off?

And lastly, your suspicions are wrong. I don't care if it's investigated another 100 times. I have complete confidence that every investigation will result with the same rational conclusions ... a plane was flown into the north tower, a second plane was flown into the south tower, a third plane was flown into the Pentagon, a 4th plane was heroically crashed in PA by the efforts of the passengers, and building #7 collapsed due to the extensive damage caused by being pounded by debris from a falling 110 story building combined with fires raging uncontrollably for 7 hours.

Let's concentrate on your video of controlled demolitions.
There are a few facts we would have to know before we could reasonably compare your examples with WTC7:

What were the amounts and what type of explosives were used in the video you supplied?
Where were the microphones that recorded those explosions placed?
Were your demolitions top down, bottom up, or otherwise?

 

[georgephillip]

Only an insane person would deny obvious visual evidence. Seems shootspeeders is a nutcase.

Here, nutcase ... again, look at the video I posted earlier. It is clearly obvious the roof begins to collapse at the 0:03 second mark while the rest of the building begins to collapse at the 10 second mark. On planet reality, 10 seconds minus 3 seconds is 7 seconds, not half a second.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WcB7fmlUyA

So let's tally up the damage ...

a) you're a truther

b) you first denied the interior fell first, then said it did, but by design

c) now you're claiming a 7 second delay is only a half second delay

yup, more than enough evidence to dismiss shootspeeders as batshit bonkers.

Are you deliberately conflating the east penthouse with the collapse of WTC7's roof-line?
How can you look at the video you just posted and not see a controlled demolition?

Not conflating, pointing out those 2 events occurred 7 seconds apart. Something not seen in a controlled demolition.

Why is that?
Do you have a credible source to verify that claim?

 

[wihosa]

I hope you don't mind, but I took the liberty to highlight the bullshit in your post ... While there was one feature normally seen in a controlled demolition (that the building fell into its own footprint), you can't ignore the fact that there were also some required elements of a controlled demolition obviously missing from building 7's demise -- notably the absence of explosives being set off throughout the building in the seconds before it collapsed.

And again, you can't ignore the fact that there would have been explosions throughout the day, bringing parts of the building down sporadically, had there been explosives planted strategically with the intent of bringing the building down, due to the fires that were burning uncontrollably.

There were numerous explosions reported by first responders, and recorded by the media.
There were multiple indications of controlled demolition like the crimp in the middle of the roof line as it begins its descent, and the lateral ejections of steel beams during collapse. I don't see why you think there would have been explosions going off during the time before collapse from isolated office fires on random floors. All the controversy we discuss tells me there are good reasons for an independent investigation into WTC7, but I suspect you don't want that. Why not?

The part which baffles me is why you and I keep going in circles in regards to the explosions. Again, I posted a video with numerous actual controlled demolitions. Presumably, you watched at least some of it. It clearly demonstrates the hallmark of a controlled demolition are the series of [big] explosions a second or two before the building comes down. There were no such explosions seen or heard coming from building 7 a second or two before it collapsed. The explosions you're talking about, the ones picked up by the media, occurred sporadically throughout the 7 hours from when the tower first pounded it with debris until it finally fell.

Also, regarding the part of your post which I highlighted ... if you don't think it was fires which set off those sporadic explosions throughout that 7 hour period, what do you think it was that set them off?

And lastly, your suspicions are wrong. I don't care if it's investigated another 100 times. I have complete confidence that every investigation will result with the same rational conclusions ... a plane was flown into the north tower, a second plane was flown into the south tower, a third plane was flown into the Pentagon, a 4th plane was heroically crashed in PA by the efforts of the passengers, and building #7 collapsed due to the extensive damage caused by being pounded by debris from a falling 110 story building combined with fires raging uncontrollably for 7 hours.

Your argument is weak. It is obvious that the planners of 911 would want to make the collapse look plausibly like a natural collapse, after all they are involved in the worst crime in our history. They would of course endeavor to limit the visible and audible evidence of explosions. The evidence of nano thermite is all through the dust. Nano thermite, a military grade incendiary/explosive, which couldn't have been made in a cave in Afghanistan, has the characteristics to allow the controlled demolition of B7 while limiting witnessed evidence.
As for when the penthouse collapsed, so what if it was seven seconds before the rest of the building. What would it prove?

Let's deal with the known indisputable facts, no plane hit B7, no modern steel framed high rise building in the world has ever collapsed due to fire, B7 did collapse, it collapsed suddenly, straight down, through the path of greatest resistance and at free fall a acceleration. The only explanation which fits the facts is controlled demolition. In order for a building to collapse like B7 hundreds of structural steel connections must fail at precisely the same moment, it is impossible for that to happen by accident.

Therefore your theory (the Official Conspiracy Theory) is impossible, leaving controlled demolition the only explanation.

When you remove the impossible what remains no matter how improbable must be the truth.

 

[daws101]

There were numerous explosions reported by first responders, and recorded by the media.
There were multiple indications of controlled demolition like the crimp in the middle of the roof line as it begins its descent, and the lateral ejections of steel beams during collapse. I don't see why you think there would have been explosions going off during the time before collapse from isolated office fires on random floors. All the controversy we discuss tells me there are good reasons for an independent investigation into WTC7, but I suspect you don't want that. Why not?

The part which baffles me is why you and I keep going in circles in regards to the explosions. Again, I posted a video with numerous actual controlled demolitions. Presumably, you watched at least some of it. It clearly demonstrates the hallmark of a controlled demolition are the series of [big] explosions a second or two before the building comes down. There were no such explosions seen or heard coming from building 7 a second or two before it collapsed. The explosions you're talking about, the ones picked up by the media, occurred sporadically throughout the 7 hours from when the tower first pounded it with debris until it finally fell.

Also, regarding the part of your post which I highlighted ... if you don't think it was fires which set off those sporadic explosions throughout that 7 hour period, what do you think it was that set them off?

And lastly, your suspicions are wrong. I don't care if it's investigated another 100 times. I have complete confidence that every investigation will result with the same rational conclusions ... a plane was flown into the north tower, a second plane was flown into the south tower, a third plane was flown into the Pentagon, a 4th plane was heroically crashed in PA by the efforts of the passengers, and building #7 collapsed due to the extensive damage caused by being pounded by debris from a falling 110 story building combined with fires raging uncontrollably for 7 hours.

Your argument is weak. It is obvious that the planners of 911 would want to make the collapse look plausibly like a natural collapse, after all they are involved in the worst crime in our history. They would of course endeavor to limit the visible and audible evidence of explosions. The evidence of nano thermite is all through the dust. Nano thermite, a military grade incendiary/explosive, which couldn't have been made in a cave in Afghanistan, has the characteristics to allow the controlled demolition of B7 while limiting witnessed evidence.
As for when the penthouse collapsed, so what if it was seven seconds before the rest of the building. What would it prove?

Let's deal with the known indisputable facts, no plane hit B7, no modern steel framed high rise building in the world has ever collapsed due to fire, B7 did collapse, it collapsed suddenly, straight down, through the path of greatest resistance and at free fall a acceleration. The only explanation which fits the facts is controlled demolition. In order for a building to collapse like B7 hundreds of structural steel connections must fail at precisely the same moment, it is impossible for that to happen by accident.

Therefore your theory (the Official Conspiracy Theory) is impossible, leaving controlled demolition the only explanation.

When you remove the impossible what remains no matter how improbable must be the truth.

bullshit!

 

[wihosa]

The part which baffles me is why you and I keep going in circles in regards to the explosions. Again, I posted a video with numerous actual controlled demolitions. Presumably, you watched at least some of it. It clearly demonstrates the hallmark of a controlled demolition are the series of [big] explosions a second or two before the building comes down. There were no such explosions seen or heard coming from building 7 a second or two before it collapsed. The explosions you're talking about, the ones picked up by the media, occurred sporadically throughout the 7 hours from when the tower first pounded it with debris until it finally fell.

Also, regarding the part of your post which I highlighted ... if you don't think it was fires which set off those sporadic explosions throughout that 7 hour period, what do you think it was that set them off?

And lastly, your suspicions are wrong. I don't care if it's investigated another 100 times. I have complete confidence that every investigation will result with the same rational conclusions ... a plane was flown into the north tower, a second plane was flown into the south tower, a third plane was flown into the Pentagon, a 4th plane was heroically crashed in PA by the efforts of the passengers, and building #7 collapsed due to the extensive damage caused by being pounded by debris from a falling 110 story building combined with fires raging uncontrollably for 7 hours.

Your argument is weak. It is obvious that the planners of 911 would want to make the collapse look plausibly like a natural collapse, after all they are involved in the worst crime in our history. They would of course endeavor to limit the visible and audible evidence of explosions. The evidence of nano thermite is all through the dust. Nano thermite, a military grade incendiary/explosive, which couldn't have been made in a cave in Afghanistan, has the characteristics to allow the controlled demolition of B7 while limiting witnessed evidence.
As for when the penthouse collapsed, so what if it was seven seconds before the rest of the building. What would it prove?

Let's deal with the known indisputable facts, no plane hit B7, no modern steel framed high rise building in the world has ever collapsed due to fire, B7 did collapse, it collapsed suddenly, straight down, through the path of greatest resistance and at free fall a acceleration. The only explanation which fits the facts is controlled demolition. In order for a building to collapse like B7 hundreds of structural steel connections must fail at precisely the same moment, it is impossible for that to happen by accident.

Therefore your theory (the Official Conspiracy Theory) is impossible, leaving controlled demolition the only explanation.

When you remove the impossible what remains no matter how improbable must be the truth.

bullshit!

Ah, there's what passes for a well reasoned rebuttle by the defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory!
Next I suppose you'll be calling me names.

It's time for all to admit the obvious truth. The OCT is a lie. Now let's get on with a real investigation. Let's let the chips fall where they may!

 

[Skylar]

Building 7 is the smokiest gun in history and proves beyond a doubt that 911 was an inside job.

Except of course, that it doesn't. While WTC 7 wasn't hit by a plane, it was hit by huge chunks of the towers as they fell. The FDNY anticipated its collapse due to fire and structural damage by about 3 hours and evacuated the area.

 

[Skylar]

It is obvious that the planners of 911 would want to make the collapse look plausibly like a natural collapse, after all they are involved in the worst crime in our history. They would of course endeavor to limit the visible and audible evidence of explosions. The evidence of nano thermite is all through the dust. Nano thermite, a military grade incendiary/explosive, which couldn't have been made in a cave in Afghanistan, has the characteristics to allow the controlled demolition of B7 while limiting witnessed evidence.
As for when the penthouse collapsed, so what if it was seven seconds before the rest of the building. What would it prove?

Nanothermite detonates with the explosive velocity of gun powder. Roughly 1/10th that of TNT. Making it sorely unsuited for explosive demolition.

Worse, an explosion, regardless of the cause, would be ludicrously audible. A fire cracker makes more noise than your imaginary 'nanothermite charges'. Actual explosive demolition is obtusely, obviously, ear jarringly loud. The initiation of the collapse of WTC 7 occurred in virtual silence.

That's not explosive demolition.

Which the FDNY makes ridiculously clear when they assessed the massive holes in the building torn by falling debris from the towers, and the huge fires burning uncontrolled in the WTC 7. The FDNY attached a transit to the side of the building earlier in the day and measured WTC 7 slow structural failure, its leaning, its buckling. And determined at around 2 or 3 oclock that the building would collapse due to fire and structural damage in only a few hours.

The FDNY was right, of course. No imaginary super secret, ninja silent explosives required.

 

[Skylar]

First of all, the roof collapses about 7 seconds before the rest of the building. By design, that does not happen in a controlled demolition. That alone is a good indication that it was not a controlled demolition which brought down building 7.

.

7 seconds!!!! HAHAHA. More like 1/2 second. What outrageous lies you govt shills tell. But then, you have no choice since your position is so contrary to the facts.

Only an insane person would deny obvious visual evidence. Seems shootspeeders is a nutcase.

Here, nutcase ... again, look at the video I posted earlier. It is clearly obvious the roof begins to collapse at the 0:03 second mark while the rest of the building begins to collapse at the 10 second mark. On planet reality, 10 seconds minus 3 seconds is 7 seconds, not half a second.



So let's tally up the damage ...

a) you're a truther

b) you first denied the interior fell first, then said it did, but by design

c) now you're claiming a 7 second delay is only a half second delay

yup, more than enough evidence to dismiss shootspeeders as batshit bonkers.

That's way, way more than half a second.

 

[georgephillip]

Building 7 is the smokiest gun in history and proves beyond a doubt that 911 was an inside job.

Except of course, that it doesn't. While WTC 7 wasn't hit by a plane, it was hit by huge chunks of the towers as they fell. The FDNY anticipated its collapse due to fire and structural damage by about 3 hours and evacuated the area.

Did the FDNY anticipate the 2.25 seconds of free fall WTC7 exhibited over 8 floors?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVCDpL4Ax7I]WTC7 in Freefall: No Longer Controversial - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Skylar]

Did the FDNY anticipate the 2.25 seconds of free fall WTC7 exhibited over 8 floors?

2.25 seconds of free fall exhibited over 8 floors....according to who? And remember, the collapse of the WTC initiated as the penthouse caved into the center of the building.

And can I take it from your reply that you acknowledge that the FDNY anticipated the collapse of WTC 7 due to fire and structural damage hours before the building came down? That they had measured the WTC 7's leaning and buckling, watched its massive fires, saw the enormous structural damage caused by falling debris from the towers, and concluded that the WTC 7 was going to collapse?

Why then would I ignore the FDNY, who were actually there and correctly predicted the building's collapse by hours....and instead believe a youtube video posted a decade later which claims to 'know better'?

 

[georgephillip]

Did the FDNY anticipate the 2.25 seconds of free fall WTC7 exhibited over 8 floors?

2.25 seconds of free fall exhibited over 8 floors....according to who? And remember, the collapse of the WTC initiated as the penthouse caved into the center of the building.

And can I take it from your reply that you acknowledge that the FDNY anticipated the collapse of WTC 7 due to fire and structural damage hours before the building came down? That they had measured the WTC 7's leaning and buckling, watched its massive fires, saw the enormous structural damage caused by falling debris from the towers, and concluded that the WTC 7 was going to collapse?

Why then would I ignore the FDNY, who were actually there and correctly predicted the building's collapse by hours....and instead believe a youtube video posted a decade later which claims to 'know better'?

Are you disputing the fact WTC7 experienced free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds?
FDNY didn't predict the free fall because they knew it was physically impossible. If you have their data on the leaning and buckling or the size of the enormous structural damage cased by falling debris, link to it
What temperatures were produced by your alleged "massive (office) fires?"
How many entire floors were fully engulfed over how many hours?
Why would you ignore the members of FDNY who currently know more than they did 13 years ago about the controlled demolition of WTC7 and aren't afraid to say so?

 

[Skylar]

Are you disputing the fact WTC7 experienced free fall acceleration for 2.25 seconds?

Obviously. As the collapse of the penthouse is the beginning of the building's collapse. And the initiation of the penthouse collapse to the point where you acknowledges the collapse began is far, far more than 2.25 seconds.
The penthouse falling into the center of WTC 7 unambiguously demonstrated that the structure's interior was already failing long before you admit it began to fail.

If you have their data on the leaning and buckling or the size of the enormous structural damage cased by falling debris, link to it

If you can provide any reason I should ignore the FDNY's assessment of the building's structural failure over hours due to catastrophic structural damage and fire....by all means present it. They measured the building's structural failure over hours by use of a transit. And accurately anticipated its collapse.
What makes your assessment more credible than theirs?

And then explain how any system of controlled demolition could operate while on fire.

And why no explosive or apparatus of explosive was ever found before, during or after the collapse. Not one inch of blasting wire, not one charge, not one detonator. Nothing.

Then explain how why the collapse occurred in virtual silence. Explosive demolition is fantastically loud. Yet there were no explosions preceding the WTC 7 collapse. Not one.

Then explain how the Port Authority bomb squad missed the thousands upon thousands of bombs in the WTC 7....despite having gone through the entire WTC plaza with bomb sniffing dogs only a week before 911.

Then explain why there were no girders cut in a manner consistent with explosive demolition, despite the 'explosive demolition' theory requiring thousands of such cuts.

Your theory is not only contradicted by the evidence, void of supporting evidence and virtually fact free.....its pointlessly complicated and fantastically elaborate. While structural failure due to structural damage and fire is consistent with the evidence, the FDNY's assessment.....and far simpler. As we can affirm both fire and structural damage. While nothing your theory mandates was ever found to exist.

Occam's Razor. Try it.

What temperatures were produced by your alleged "massive (office) fires?"

It's not me that alleges it. But the FDNY who reported 'massive fires'. You'll need to give us a good reason to ignore them. And so far, you have none.

Why would you ignore the members of FDNY who currently know more than they did 13 years ago about the controlled demolition of WTC7 and aren't afraid to say so?

Cite them rather than paraphrase them, and we'll discuss it. I'm more than happy to show you the direct quotes from fire fighter after fire fighter, fire chiefs and captains talking of the massive fires, enormous structural damage, or their assessment of the building's imminent collapse.

Would you like such quotes? Or will you immediately ignore them?

 

[jillian]

Did the FDNY anticipate the 2.25 seconds of free fall WTC7 exhibited over 8 floors?

2.25 seconds of free fall exhibited over 8 floors....according to who? And remember, the collapse of the WTC initiated as the penthouse caved into the center of the building.

And can I take it from your reply that you acknowledge that the FDNY anticipated the collapse of WTC 7 due to fire and structural damage hours before the building came down? That they had measured the WTC 7's leaning and buckling, watched its massive fires, saw the enormous structural damage caused by falling debris from the towers, and concluded that the WTC 7 was going to collapse?

Why then would I ignore the FDNY, who were actually there and correctly predicted the building's collapse by hours....and instead believe a youtube video posted a decade later which claims to 'know better'?

troofers always think they know better, but know nothing.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Except of course, that it doesn't. While WTC 7 wasn't hit by a plane, it was hit by huge chunks of the towers as they fell. The FDNY anticipated its collapse due to fire and structural damage by about 3 hours and evacuated the area.

Hit by huge chunks??? Then why didn't it fall immediately?. Fact is there was just small damage to 7 and that was all on one side. No way that can cause a unitary collapse. THINK

 

[Skylar]

Except of course, that it doesn't. While WTC 7 wasn't hit by a plane, it was hit by huge chunks of the towers as they fell. The FDNY anticipated its collapse due to fire and structural damage by about 3 hours and evacuated the area.

Hit by huge chunks??? Then why didn't it fall immediately?. Fact is there was just small damage to 7 and that was all on one side. No way that can cause a unitary collapse. THINK

Reread what you just responded to, this time not ignoring the word 'fire' in 'fire and structural damage.

And 'thinking', why were there no explosions preceding the collapse of the WTC 7? Explosive demolition is enormously loud. Yet the initiation of the collapse of the WTC 7 was almost entirely silent. How is this possible?

You deal with this massive inconsistency in the conspiracy narrative by choosing not to think about it.

'Thinking', what system of explosives works while on fire? Detonators would have detonated, blasting wire would have blasted and timers/receivers would been reduced to bubbling pools of plastic. There's a reason why we don't explosively demolish a building while its on fire.

You again deal with this massive hole in the conspiracy narrative by choosing not to think about it.

'Thinking', where were all the girders cut by explosive demolition? There would have had to been thousands of them. Yet we saw twisted girders. We saw deformed girders. We saw loose girders. But no cut girders.

How do you deal with this theory killing hole in the truther narrative? Again, you choose not to think about it.

'Thinking', why where there no explosives or apparatus of explosives found before, during or after the collapse of any building on 911? The Port Authority Bomb squad went through the entire WTC plaza with bomb sniffing dogs only a week before 911 and found nothing.

Still not thinking about it, huh?

'Thinking', why is there no residue of explosives in any of the dust samples from 911? There's sheet rock, theirs rock wool, there's wood ash. The analysis was so precise it even detected medication from the WTC pharmacy. But no residue of any kind of explosive. This despite 10s of thousands of 'bombs' per the conspiracy narrative.

You're still not going to think about it, are you?

I choose not to ignore what you do, instead choosing to think about how awful the 'bomb' theory is as an explanation of 911. How void of evidence it is, how many holes it has, how ludicrously complicated and fantastically complex the theory is.

While 'fire and structural damage' is simple, plausible, and the exact conclusion the FDNY came to on the scene as they measured WTC 7's slow structural failure over hours.

 

[georgephillip]

Except of course, that it doesn't. While WTC 7 wasn't hit by a plane, it was hit by huge chunks of the towers as they fell. The FDNY anticipated its collapse due to fire and structural damage by about 3 hours and evacuated the area.

Hit by huge chunks??? Then why didn't it fall immediately?. Fact is there was just small damage to 7 and that was all on one side. No way that can cause a unitary collapse. THINK

Reread what you just responded to, this time not ignoring the word 'fire' in 'fire and structural damage.

And 'thinking', why were there no explosions preceding the collapse of the WTC 7? Explosive demolition is enormously loud. Yet the initiation of the collapse of the WTC 7 was almost entirely silent. How is this possible?

You deal with this massive inconsistency in the conspiracy narrative by choosing not to think about it.

'Thinking', what system of explosives works while on fire? Detonators would have detonated, blasting wire would have blasted and timers/receivers would been reduced to bubbling pools of plastic. There's a reason why we don't explosively demolish a building while its on fire.

You again deal with this massive hole in the conspiracy narrative by choosing not to think about it.

'Thinking', where were all the girders cut by explosive demolition? There would have had to been thousands of them. Yet we saw twisted girders. We saw deformed girders. We saw loose girders. But no cut girders.

How do you deal with this theory killing hole in the truther narrative? Again, you choose not to think about it.

'Thinking', why where there no explosives or apparatus of explosives found before, during or after the collapse of any building on 911? The Port Authority Bomb squad went through the entire WTC plaza with bomb sniffing dogs only a week before 911 and found nothing.

Still not thinking about it, huh?

'Thinking', why is there no residue of explosives in any of the dust samples from 911? There's sheet rock, theirs rock wool, there's wood ash. The analysis was so precise it even detected medication from the WTC pharmacy. But no residue of any kind of explosive. This despite 10s of thousands of 'bombs' per the conspiracy narrative.

You're still not going to think about it, are you?

I choose not to ignore what you do, instead choosing to think about how awful the 'bomb' theory is as an explanation of 911. How void of evidence it is, how many holes it has, how ludicrously complicated and fantastically complex the theory is.

While 'fire and structural damage' is simple, plausible, and the exact conclusion the FDNY came to on the scene as they measured WTC 7's slow structural failure over hours.

Now prove how "WTC7's slow structural failure over hours" resulted in an eight second collapse through the path of greatest resistance with 2.25 seconds of that collapse occurring at free fall?

Please note the word "prove."