Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
/——/ “jet fuel fires only burns at 1600 degrees and steel has to melt at 2700 degrees”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.You're belief(s) parrot the official gov't lies that the msm corroborates- and you still haven't answered my questions -it seems you presume I believe something or someone.
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.
Factually incorrect.2 airplanes brought down 3 bldg's into their own foot printIdentify the lie in the 9/11 Commission Report please.
Really? How did they wire 3 buildings with nobody noticing?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-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.
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
Steel doesn't "collapse"- I beams and box tubing made from steel doesn't collapse- if softened, it bends. Try again.The steel beams only had to soften to lose their strength causing the collapse.
Two airplanes did bring down 3 buildings. But it was not in their own footprints.2 airplanes brought down 3 bldg's into their own foot printIdentify the lie in the 9/11 Commission Report please.
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
No. They didn't. And it was into their own foot print.Two airplanes did bring down 3 buildings. But it was not in their own footprints.
/——/ The buildings collapsed, ya big dope.Steel doesn't "collapse"- I beams and box tubing made from steel doesn't collapse- if softened, it bends. Try again.The steel beams only had to soften to lose their strength causing the collapse.
That's my point, stupid.The buildings collapsed, ya big dope.
/—-/ You’re just playing word games. My point was clear in my original post.That's my point, stupid.The buildings collapsed, ya big dope.
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
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.No. They didn't. And it was into their own foot print.Two airplanes did bring down 3 buildings. But it was not in their own footprints.
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?Some = few = not many= words mean things- and no one has answered the questions I asked- lots if deflection and goal post moving though-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.