I'd enjoy an intellectual discussion-

[Gdjjr]

THE TOP 40 Reasons to Doubt the Official Story

Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93: The 9/11 Commission’s Incredible Tales

 

[Gdjjr]

Further more- it was not Jumbo Jets that hit the towers

 

[Cellblock2429]

it seems you presume I believe something or someone.

You're belief(s) parrot the official gov't lies that the msm corroborates- and you still haven't answered my questions -

Gdjjr you might as well do with jc456 I did with him a long time ago not bother with him anymore or read his posts and just go on to someone else who is not closed minded and afraid of the evidence afraid to watch videos. It is so obvious he either can’t read or has Alzheimer’s same as smellybozo does the fact he never remembers that surviving witnesses prove the best architects and engineers in the world were correct saying it’s impossible for steel framed towers to fall at the speed they did in their own footprint instead of toppling over as they should have.

He obviously skipped junior high school science classes clueless of the laws of physics,ignoring facts that jet fuel fires only burns at 1600 degrees and steel has to melt at 2700 degrees thst it was impossible for the fires to remove the columns of steel which is required for them to collapse like that,this is stuff junior high kids know so he OBVIOUSLY skipped junior high school physics classes.

he has proven he obviously can’t read or has Alzheimer’s diseace sense he keeps ignoring witnesses said they heard explosions in the basement before the towers were hit above. Why keep arguing with someone who obviously either cannot read or has Alzheimer’s disease?

Your time would be better spent explaining it to someone not afraid,that can read and not in denial mode,go on to the next person,who gives a shit if he is afraid to look at the evidence in videos,I sure don’t. That’s why I let him talk to himself.why waste time on someone who is either one of two things,can’t read or has Alzheimer’s,makes no sense,ignore him as I have and go on to the next person.

/——/ “jet fuel fires only burns at 1600 degrees and steel has to melt at 2700 degrees”
The steel beams only had to soften to lose their strength causing the collapse. But, you conspiracy wackjobs ignore that fact.

 

[candycorn]

Identify the lie in the 9/11 Commission Report please.

2 airplanes brought down 3 bldg's into their own foot print

Factually incorrect.

 

[candycorn]

You're in "failure analysis"? You should analyze the failure of the 9/11 Truth movement. In 20 years, you've done nothing but solidify the thought that every last one of you are idiots. Perhaps posting a compelling counter narrative to the 9/11 Commission Report (the one with which you can identify no lies) would convince us that you actually do know what you're talking about. So far, you've posted stuff that is inaccurate (lies) and think being asked to explain what you think happened is a "gotcha" question.

I've posted the links you refuse to read- and I don't know how many times I have to tell you, what I "think" happened is immaterial- I know what happened- 3 bldg's (one not hit by an aircraft) fell into their own foot print at near free fall speed- and I did identify the lie- and I will identify aslo, lying by omission- as in redacted names- I'll also, point out again, there was no criminal investigation into mass murder-

Your pejorative attacks show you have no counter argument- you feel killing the messenger will kill the message-

Here- try this- take any article posted and show/tell where it's wrong or inaccurate-
start with the below

60 Structural Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Demolition

Editor's Note: Since its inception in 2006, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth has remained steadfast in its mission of exposing the flaws in the claims made by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) — namely, that the impact of two planes and the resulting fires brought down three steel-framed skyscrapers on September 11, 2001. We do scientific, cogent, and comprehensive analyses, backed by forensically-tested, unassailable facts.

One outcome of our insistence on remaining true to our mission is that our ranks of signatories has swelled from less than a dozen to more than 3,000 building and technical professionals who are petitioning the government for a new, independent investigation of the catastrophic destruction at the World Trade Center on 9/11. Additionally, over 20,000 citizens have signed the AE911Truth petition, and more than 500,000 supporters have "liked" our Facebook page.

That's why he and nearly 3,000 other degreed and/or licensed architects and engineers — including 60 structural engineers who hail from the US, Canada, Australia, the UK, and Europe — have signed the petition that demands an unbiased, unimpeachable investigation of the World Trade Center's destruction. Every day, more professionals — all of them carefully vetted by AE's verification team — join the existing signatories.

Free Fall and Building 7 on 9/11

Editor’s Note: With his background as a teacher of physics, David Chandler has made invaluable contributions to the pursuit of 9/11 truth and justice, helping to make technical aspects of the controlled demolition of all three World Trade Center buildings more accessible to laypersons. In this article, he covers one of the more damning pieces of evidence that disproves the official account, the free fall of Building 7.

Lack of Deceleration of North Tower’s Upper Section Proves Use of Explosives

View attachment 480451

Really? How did they wire 3 buildings with nobody noticing?
How did the two buildings that were hit by air craft still have the explosives in tact--all of the explosives in tact despite being hit by aircraft?
Why was no evidence of explosives found at ground zero?
Why were other buildings destroyed by the falling towers if they fell in their footprint

Your move.

 

[Gdjjr]

The steel beams only had to soften to lose their strength causing the collapse.

Steel doesn't "collapse"- I beams and box tubing made from steel doesn't collapse- if softened, it bends. Try again.

 

[candycorn]

Identify the lie in the 9/11 Commission Report please.

2 airplanes brought down 3 bldg's into their own foot print

Two airplanes did bring down 3 buildings. But it was not in their own footprints.

 

[Gdjjr]

Really? How did they wire 3 buildings with nobody noticing?
How did the two buildings that were hit by air craft still have the explosives in tact--all of the explosives in tact despite being hit by aircraft?
Why was no evidence of explosives found at ground zero?
Why were other buildings destroyed by the falling towers if they fell in their footprint

Now, let me ask you something I've asked before; Why do you believe the lyingest entity on the planet?

Then, do you know what bldg codes are? Then do you know how engineers design? Then have you ever heard of the PE (professional engineer) fudge factor, which is common practice when designing? Do you know what that is? Do you know about liquid fuels? Do you know the difference between ignition (flash) point temperature and burn temperature in a controlled vs non-controlled environment? Do you know the difference between temperature and heat?

No? All that information is available at your finger tips- IF you really want to know. Obviously you don't. You just want to try to discredit me- it ain't working- you can't, legitimately- and pejoratives don't do anything other than validate what I say-

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

Documenting the Destruction of Physical Evidence at the World Trade Center

 

[Gdjjr]

Two airplanes did bring down 3 buildings. But it was not in their own footprints.

No. They didn't. And it was into their own foot print.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The steel beams only had to soften to lose their strength causing the collapse.

Steel doesn't "collapse"- I beams and box tubing made from steel doesn't collapse- if softened, it bends. Try again.

/——/ The buildings collapsed, ya big dope.

 

[Gdjjr]

Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction

We agree with the RJ Lee report that the abundance of “spherical particles of iron and silicates” is proof of high temperatures, and that these particles are not common in normal office dust, but we do not agree that this abundance is necessarily due to the “fire that accompanied the WTC Event”. Before drawing such a conclusion, one must scrutinize the temperatures and other conditions needed to form these molten spheres (iron melts at 1,538 °C (2,800 °F) while iron (III) oxide melts at 1,565 °C (2,849 °F) [6] and aluminosilicates melt around 1,450 C [7]) and then compare with conditions reached in the WTC fires. We will turn to this task, after considering other data which also point to anomalously high temperatures during the WTC destruction

snip

The temperature required to volatilize/boil lead is 1,740 C or 3,164 F [8]. No explanation for the origin of the indicated “extremely high temperatures during the collapse” is offered in the RJ Lee report.

 

[Gdjjr]

The buildings collapsed, ya big dope.

That's my point, stupid.

 

[Cellblock2429]

The buildings collapsed, ya big dope.

That's my point, stupid.

/—-/ You’re just playing word games. My point was clear in my original post.

 

[candycorn]

Really? How did they wire 3 buildings with nobody noticing?
How did the two buildings that were hit by air craft still have the explosives in tact--all of the explosives in tact despite being hit by aircraft?
Why was no evidence of explosives found at ground zero?
Why were other buildings destroyed by the falling towers if they fell in their footprint

Now, let me ask you something I've asked before; Why do you believe the lyingest entity on the planet?

Then, do you know what bldg codes are? Then do you know how engineers design? Then have you ever heard of the PE (professional engineer) fudge factor, which is common practice when designing? Do you know what that is? Do you know about liquid fuels? Do you know the difference between ignition (flash) point temperature and burn temperature in a controlled vs non-controlled environment? Do you know the difference between temperature and heat?

No? All that information is available at your finger tips- IF you really want to know. Obviously you don't. You just want to try to discredit me- it ain't working- you can't, legitimately- and pejoratives don't do anything other than validate what I say-

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

Documenting the Destruction of Physical Evidence at the World Trade Center

See, this is the problem...you keep making crazy allegations that are not in line with the known facts. You do an excellent job of discrediting yourself because you're ignorant of the facts and there is no need to consider any argument you're making otherwise. It would be like you saying Joe Namath was the greatest punter in NFL history. When you're told Joe Willie never punted...you're fallback would be something along the lines of, The NFL lied about traumatic brain injury.

So here are the questions yet again...

Really? How did they wire 3 buildings with nobody noticing? Its a very small jump in logic to see how impossible this would be. Its something you have never explained yet you continue to insist that the buildings were wired for controlled demolition.

How did the two buildings that were hit by air craft still have the explosives in tact--all of the explosives in tact despite being hit by aircraft? None of the miles of wiring that would be needed were found, none of the charges that would be disloged were found.

Why was no evidence of explosives found at ground zero? (Thermite isn't an explosive). Again, no unexploded ordinance was found at ground zero.

Why were other buildings destroyed by the falling towers if they fell in their footprint? If something falls in it's own footprint, other buildings nearby wouldn't have been destroyed. Other buildings were. Yet you continue to discredit yourself by broadcasting this lie over and over.

 

[candycorn]

Two airplanes did bring down 3 buildings. But it was not in their own footprints.

No. They didn't. And it was into their own foot print.

Why were other buildings destroyed by the falling towers if they fell in their footprint? If something falls in it's own footprint, other buildings nearby wouldn't have been destroyed. Other buildings were. Yet you continue to discredit yourself by broadcasting this lie over and over.

 

[Gdjjr]

Key Evidence of Controlled Demolition

Near-Free-Fall Acceleration | Twin Towers

Explosive Features | Twin Towers

Eyewitness Accounts of Explosions | Twin Towers


High-Temperature Thermitic Reactions | Twin Towers

 

[Gdjjr]

The Official Theory | Twin Towers

Free-Fall Acceleration | World Trade Center Building 7

Today, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) acknowledges that WTC 7 fell at a rate of free fall (or the rate of gravity) for a period of approximately 2.25 seconds before it started to slow down. David Chandler, a physics teacher who has studied the behavior of WTC 7 extensively, explains the significance of free fall in the article titled “Free Fall and Building 7 on 9/11” . .

Explosions | World Trade Center Building 7

 

[candycorn]

A lot of you conspiracy nut-jobs don't think there were any planes involved so I guess you've evolved a tad bit since 9/11/01. Congrats.

Some = few = not many= words mean things- and no one has answered the questions I asked- lots if deflection and goal post moving though-

Good to see you acknowledge that 4 planes bit the dust on 9/11. You really should be more careful. Because now...your story begins to comes apart. Such is the plight of the moron who continues to ignore the known facts of the day and spew nonsense that doesn't coincide with those facts. According to you the planes were not needed and controlled demolition brought down the towers. So that would mean that someone (who you won't name) went through all of the trouble of sending middle easterners to flight schools and getting them to volunteer for suicide missions--on four aircraft. We know for a fact that four of the 19 hijackers were enrolled in flight school and died on 9/11 in the planes. Any idea why the plotters would add that to the "in-box" when they didn't need to?

Also please explain why the muslims were not from Iraq if the end goal was to make us all hot and bothered to invade Iraq.

 

[Gdjjr]

Steel Sulfidation | World Trade Center Building 7

In a New York Times article published in February 2002, James Glanz and Eric Lipton wrote:


“Perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation involves extremely thin bits of steel collected...from 7 World Trade Center.... The steel apparently melted away, but no fire in any of the buildings was believed to be hot enough to melt steel outright.... A preliminary analysis at Worcester Polytechnic Institute [WPI]...suggests that sulfur released during the fires—no one knows from where—may have combined with atoms in the steel to form compounds that melt at lower temperatures.”


https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/evidence-overview

 

[candycorn]

Key Evidence of Controlled Demolition

Near-Free-Fall Acceleration | Twin Towers

Explosive Features | Twin Towers

Eyewitness Accounts of Explosions | Twin Towers


High-Temperature Thermitic Reactions | Twin Towers

View attachment 480472

Cool...thermite.

How much thermite would be needed to take down 200 stories of the World Trade Center; shredding much of the contents along the way?

20 pounds of it didnt do the job on an XBOX in this video: