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.
No, I posted FACTS from the NIST website and how the "9 second" originated. It's not a "veiwpoint". Every single video you watch of the collapses from initiation until it's completed (or can no longer be seen due to dust), shows the collapse taking WAY longer than 9.2 second.I disagree...you have just posted an alternative viewpoint. You claimed that WTC 1 fell in 15 seconds when the NIST, which was paid for by "da gubermint" to investigate the structure failure says that it came down in 11 seconds and they also admit that WTC 2 came down in 9 seconds......believe what you want to believe and whatever makes you sleep better at night.
One fell in 11 seconds...one fell in 9 seconds and that is the official story of the NIST that backs the official story....so you lose that one.Yet you haven't have you?As I said, this is one issue that we are going to just have to agree to disagree on. For every point you make, I can counter it with someone else and vice versa.
1. You claim the towers fell in 9.2 seconds. False. I have proven that. Or are you going to present evidence that supports it?
2. You claim the towers fell in their own footprint. False. I have provided evidence that shows a 600 foot damage radius. The footprint of the towers was 208 feet.
That's just a couple.
If you want to counter, then do it please. you have yet to counter anything I've presented.
Just to show you that you are wrong, here is the link once again, to NIST's FAQ with the quoted section.I disagree...you have just posted an alternative viewpoint. You claimed that WTC 1 fell in 15 seconds when the NIST, which was paid for by "da gubermint" to investigate the structure failure says that it came down in 11 seconds and they also admit that WTC 2 came down in 9 seconds......
NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. These elapsed times were based on: (1) precise timing of the initiation of collapse from video evidence, and (2) ground motion (seismic) signals recorded at Palisades, N.Y., that also were precisely time-calibrated for wave transmission times from lower Manhattan (see NIST NCSTAR 1-5A).
Read the link above regarding the NIST FAQ page. Videos also support what is said there. You are wrong on every level. Or are you disagreeing with video evidence and NIST's FAQ page just to be difficult? Care to explain why you don't want to believe video evidence and NIST's own FAQ page?One fell in 11 seconds...one fell in 9 seconds and that is the official story of the NIST that backs the official story....so you lose that one.
What does this even mean?When you have a building that is 110 stories tall and there is no history of there ever being a controlled demolition of a building that tall? I would say that the ones that planted the explosives did a great job given the circumstances.
This information is incorrect also. A part of WTC7 fell outside it's footprint and damaged Fiterman Hall accross the street.This is simply not true. Below is the damage radius.
How many of the videos were pointed in the direction of the plane and impact point?
Oddly enough, WTC 3, 4, 5 and 6 did not collapse but the WTC 7 that was on the outer ring of this diagram did...right inside it's own footprint.
Are you also now admitting that the "fell inside it's own footprint" is false regarding WTC1 and WTC2 after being shown proof?
Why do you keep moving the goalposts when shown evidence contrary to what you claim instead of admitting it was wrong and moving forward? What does WTC, 3, 4, 5 and 6 have to do with you claiming that WTc1, WTC2, and WTC7 fell inside their own footprint?
No, not at all I still contend that the buildings fell down in basically their own footprint. I do not believe that the weight of 20 stories could cause the other 90 to collapse with no resistance. I have also seen the footage of WTC 7 going straight down in it's own footprint...I mean, the videos are there for everyone to see. I was a denier for 11 years and refused to look at anything that didn't fall in lockstep with my belief. If you really think that you are going to make me believe that this was just a massive series of unfortunate coincidences and miss-steps by NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades taking directions from a guy on a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan? We might as well agree to end this conversation. I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain, what the repercussions would be..,..like how the Patriot Act was written in advance of this event. That enough should set off your bullshit detector....but whatever. I enjoyed the discussion.
NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades
Nope. The 19 terrorists overpowered a handful of crew.
NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon had nothing to do with it.
I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain,
Sure you did.
Your understanding of the events that day are rather sad and what the duties were of each agency that got publiclly buttfucked in front of the entire world...but it is typical....Go, "Merica!
No, I haven't seen a single video that shows 15 seconds plus of either tower taking that long to collapse ...but even if it took 20 seconds to fall from 110 stories to the ground would I buy the official story. NIST says 11 seconds for one building and 9 for the other but be that as it may, I not believe the bullshit we were told even though there was a time when I did.Just to show you that you are wrong, here is the link once again, to NIST's FAQ with the quoted section.I disagree...you have just posted an alternative viewpoint. You claimed that WTC 1 fell in 15 seconds when the NIST, which was paid for by "da gubermint" to investigate the structure failure says that it came down in 11 seconds and they also admit that WTC 2 came down in 9 seconds......
FAQs - NIST WTC Towers Investigation
NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. These elapsed times were based on: (1) precise timing of the initiation of collapse from video evidence, and (2) ground motion (seismic) signals recorded at Palisades, N.Y., that also were precisely time-calibrated for wave transmission times from lower Manhattan (see NIST NCSTAR 1-5A).
So now you have that, coupled with videos of the collapse show the collapse times of the towers to be much longer than 9.2 seconds.
Are you going to refute that with your own evidence? This isn't a matter of opinion. Facts are facts. You want to leave it as "we're just going to disagree" because you can't refute what I have presented which makes your claims wrong.
One fell in 11 seconds...one fell in 9 seconds and that is the official story of the NIST that backs the official story....so you lose that one.Yet you haven't have you?As I said, this is one issue that we are going to just have to agree to disagree on. For every point you make, I can counter it with someone else and vice versa.
1. You claim the towers fell in 9.2 seconds. False. I have proven that. Or are you going to present evidence that supports it?
2. You claim the towers fell in their own footprint. False. I have provided evidence that shows a 600 foot damage radius. The footprint of the towers was 208 feet.
That's just a couple.
If you want to counter, then do it please. you have yet to counter anything I've presented.
When you have a building that is 110 stories tall and there is no history of there ever being a controlled demolition of a building that tall? I would say that the ones that planted the explosives did a great job given the circumstances.
Bottom line is your belief that the buildings collapsed in about 9.2 seconds is completely unfounded and proven to be wrong.No, I haven't seen a single video that shows 15 seconds plus of either tower taking that long to collapse ...but even if it took 20 seconds to fall from 110 stories to the ground would I buy the official story. NIST says 11 seconds for one building and 9 for the other but be that as it may, I not believe the bullshit we were told even though there was a time when I did.
This information is incorrect also. A part of WTC7 fell outside it's footprint and damaged Fiterman Hall accross the street.Oddly enough, WTC 3, 4, 5 and 6 did not collapse but the WTC 7 that was on the outer ring of this diagram did...right inside it's own footprint.
Are you also now admitting that the "fell inside it's own footprint" is false regarding WTC1 and WTC2 after being shown proof?
Why do you keep moving the goalposts when shown evidence contrary to what you claim instead of admitting it was wrong and moving forward? What does WTC, 3, 4, 5 and 6 have to do with you claiming that WTc1, WTC2, and WTC7 fell inside their own footprint?
No, not at all I still contend that the buildings fell down in basically their own footprint. I do not believe that the weight of 20 stories could cause the other 90 to collapse with no resistance. I have also seen the footage of WTC 7 going straight down in it's own footprint...I mean, the videos are there for everyone to see. I was a denier for 11 years and refused to look at anything that didn't fall in lockstep with my belief. If you really think that you are going to make me believe that this was just a massive series of unfortunate coincidences and miss-steps by NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades taking directions from a guy on a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan? We might as well agree to end this conversation. I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain, what the repercussions would be..,..like how the Patriot Act was written in advance of this event. That enough should set off your bullshit detector....but whatever. I enjoyed the discussion.
NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades
Nope. The 19 terrorists overpowered a handful of crew.
NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon had nothing to do with it.
I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain,
Sure you did.
Your understanding of the events that day are rather sad and what the duties were of each agency that got publiclly buttfucked in front of the entire world...but it is typical....Go, "Merica!
It's true, NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon weren't on any of the planes that day.
Bottom line is your belief that the buildings collapsed in about 9.2 seconds is completely unfounded and proven to be wrong.No, I haven't seen a single video that shows 15 seconds plus of either tower taking that long to collapse ...but even if it took 20 seconds to fall from 110 stories to the ground would I buy the official story. NIST says 11 seconds for one building and 9 for the other but be that as it may, I not believe the bullshit we were told even though there was a time when I did.
You are correct in saying that this discussion should end as there is nothing more anyone can show you when you blatantly choose to ignore FACTS that prove what you claim as being wrong.
Have a good day.
If you choose to provide evidence against what I have shown you, feel free and we can pick it up once again.
And I have repeatedly shown you that this is wrong, yet you refuse to take your fingers out of your ears and stop saying "la la la la la".NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9
This information is incorrect also. A part of WTC7 fell outside it's footprint and damaged Fiterman Hall accross the street.
Are you also now admitting that the "fell inside it's own footprint" is false regarding WTC1 and WTC2 after being shown proof?
Why do you keep moving the goalposts when shown evidence contrary to what you claim instead of admitting it was wrong and moving forward? What does WTC, 3, 4, 5 and 6 have to do with you claiming that WTc1, WTC2, and WTC7 fell inside their own footprint?
No, not at all I still contend that the buildings fell down in basically their own footprint. I do not believe that the weight of 20 stories could cause the other 90 to collapse with no resistance. I have also seen the footage of WTC 7 going straight down in it's own footprint...I mean, the videos are there for everyone to see. I was a denier for 11 years and refused to look at anything that didn't fall in lockstep with my belief. If you really think that you are going to make me believe that this was just a massive series of unfortunate coincidences and miss-steps by NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades taking directions from a guy on a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan? We might as well agree to end this conversation. I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain, what the repercussions would be..,..like how the Patriot Act was written in advance of this event. That enough should set off your bullshit detector....but whatever. I enjoyed the discussion.
NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades
Nope. The 19 terrorists overpowered a handful of crew.
NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon had nothing to do with it.
I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain,
Sure you did.
Your understanding of the events that day are rather sad and what the duties were of each agency that got publiclly buttfucked in front of the entire world...but it is typical....Go, "Merica!
It's true, NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon weren't on any of the planes that day.
NORAD sent military jet fighters 15 minutes after Payne Stewart's private jet lost contact
Bottom line is your belief that the buildings collapsed in about 9.2 seconds is completely unfounded and proven to be wrong.No, I haven't seen a single video that shows 15 seconds plus of either tower taking that long to collapse ...but even if it took 20 seconds to fall from 110 stories to the ground would I buy the official story. NIST says 11 seconds for one building and 9 for the other but be that as it may, I not believe the bullshit we were told even though there was a time when I did.
You are correct in saying that this discussion should end as there is nothing more anyone can show you when you blatantly choose to ignore FACTS that prove what you claim as being wrong.
Have a good day.
If you choose to provide evidence against what I have shown you, feel free and we can pick it up once again.
NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9 seconds...and like I said...even if it took 20 seconds for them to collapse, it still defies the laws of physics because 90 floors that were unaffected by the plane crash should provide plenty of resistance. The official story is not plausible in my honest opinion...but you think it does I respect that as well as your opinion....good on ya.
And I have repeatedly shown you that this is wrong, yet you refuse to take your fingers out of your ears and stop saying "la la la la la".NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9
I have given you a link to NIST's FAQ page...
See what I said there? NIST'S FAQ PAGE?
The page from NIST explains where they got the 11 and 9 second timeframe from. It's NOT the total collapse timeframe, it's the timeframe it took the outside perimeter panels to hit the ground when they came loose from the structure at the collapse initiation.
You continue to claim NIST said something and I provide you links from NIST that prove otherwise.
The fact the you cannot or will not understand this fact is mind boggling.
And I have made it very clear that even if the NIST claimed that it was as much as twenty seconds before WTC 1 and 2 fell completely to the ground that it would not change my mind that it was a controlled demolition. They said it was 11 and 9 seconds respectively and they are trying to sell the official story...you see, they are on YOUR side. You believe the official version...I don't nor will I ever buy this load of horseshit...you, on the other hand do buy the official version and I respect that. Why can't you respect MY right to no longer buy into what I believe is a load of horseshit? Why does it offend your sense of decorum that I don't believe anything "da gubermint" tells me? How does it affect you personally? I have more than made my case as to why the official version reeks to high heaven...you have made your case as to how it doesn't. You are not going to "one up" me when it comes to this no matter how hard you try....let it go and move on because we are never going to agree.And I have repeatedly shown you that this is wrong, yet you refuse to take your fingers out of your ears and stop saying "la la la la la".NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9
I have given you a link to NIST's FAQ page...
See what I said there? NIST'S FAQ PAGE?
The page from NIST explains where they got the 11 and 9 second timeframe from. It's NOT the total collapse timeframe, it's the timeframe it took the outside perimeter panels to hit the ground when they came loose from the structure at the collapse initiation.
You continue to claim NIST said something and I provide you links from NIST that prove otherwise.
The fact the you cannot or will not understand this fact is mind boggling.
Todd, you don't have the intellect to even comprehend...you really need to shut the fuck up because your comprehension abilities of what I posted about is akin to that of a mentally challenged 8 year old. I don't have the patience nor the energy to spoon feed you.No, not at all I still contend that the buildings fell down in basically their own footprint. I do not believe that the weight of 20 stories could cause the other 90 to collapse with no resistance. I have also seen the footage of WTC 7 going straight down in it's own footprint...I mean, the videos are there for everyone to see. I was a denier for 11 years and refused to look at anything that didn't fall in lockstep with my belief. If you really think that you are going to make me believe that this was just a massive series of unfortunate coincidences and miss-steps by NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades taking directions from a guy on a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan? We might as well agree to end this conversation. I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain, what the repercussions would be..,..like how the Patriot Act was written in advance of this event. That enough should set off your bullshit detector....but whatever. I enjoyed the discussion.
NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades
Nope. The 19 terrorists overpowered a handful of crew.
NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon had nothing to do with it.
I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain,
Sure you did.
Your understanding of the events that day are rather sad and what the duties were of each agency that got publiclly buttfucked in front of the entire world...but it is typical....Go, "Merica!
It's true, NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon weren't on any of the planes that day.
NORAD sent military jet fighters 15 minutes after Payne Stewart's private jet lost contact
Bottom line is your belief that the buildings collapsed in about 9.2 seconds is completely unfounded and proven to be wrong.No, I haven't seen a single video that shows 15 seconds plus of either tower taking that long to collapse ...but even if it took 20 seconds to fall from 110 stories to the ground would I buy the official story. NIST says 11 seconds for one building and 9 for the other but be that as it may, I not believe the bullshit we were told even though there was a time when I did.
You are correct in saying that this discussion should end as there is nothing more anyone can show you when you blatantly choose to ignore FACTS that prove what you claim as being wrong.
Have a good day.
If you choose to provide evidence against what I have shown you, feel free and we can pick it up once again.
NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9 seconds...and like I said...even if it took 20 seconds for them to collapse, it still defies the laws of physics because 90 floors that were unaffected by the plane crash should provide plenty of resistance. The official story is not plausible in my honest opinion...but you think it does I respect that as well as your opinion....good on ya.
NORAD sent military jet fighters 15 minutes after Payne Stewart's private jet lost contact
And they didn't have anything close on 9/11.
And that's not proof of explosives. Or thermite.
Todd, you don't have the intellect to even comprehend...you really need to shut the fuck up because your comprehension abilities of what I posted about is akin to that of a mentally challenged 8 year old. I don't have the patience nor the energy to spoon feed you.NORAD, the CIA, the NSA, CIA and the Pentagon and were outsmarted by 17 alleged terrorists armed with nothing but box cutter blades
Nope. The 19 terrorists overpowered a handful of crew.
NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon had nothing to do with it.
I followed the money and I found out who had the most to gain,
Sure you did.
Your understanding of the events that day are rather sad and what the duties were of each agency that got publiclly buttfucked in front of the entire world...but it is typical....Go, "Merica!
It's true, NORAD, the CIA, NSA and Pentagon weren't on any of the planes that day.
NORAD sent military jet fighters 15 minutes after Payne Stewart's private jet lost contact
Bottom line is your belief that the buildings collapsed in about 9.2 seconds is completely unfounded and proven to be wrong.No, I haven't seen a single video that shows 15 seconds plus of either tower taking that long to collapse ...but even if it took 20 seconds to fall from 110 stories to the ground would I buy the official story. NIST says 11 seconds for one building and 9 for the other but be that as it may, I not believe the bullshit we were told even though there was a time when I did.
You are correct in saying that this discussion should end as there is nothing more anyone can show you when you blatantly choose to ignore FACTS that prove what you claim as being wrong.
Have a good day.
If you choose to provide evidence against what I have shown you, feel free and we can pick it up once again.
NIST even said that the buildings came down in 11 and 9 seconds...and like I said...even if it took 20 seconds for them to collapse, it still defies the laws of physics because 90 floors that were unaffected by the plane crash should provide plenty of resistance. The official story is not plausible in my honest opinion...but you think it does I respect that as well as your opinion....good on ya.
NORAD sent military jet fighters 15 minutes after Payne Stewart's private jet lost contact
And they didn't have anything close on 9/11.
And that's not proof of explosives. Or thermite.
It doesn't make one bit of difference which "side" they are on. Facts are facts. You have been shown that your 9.2 second collapse time was garbage. If you want to continue to spew it, that's up to you.And I have made it very clear that even if the NIST claimed that it was as much as twenty seconds before WTC 1 and 2 fell completely to the ground that it would not change my mind that it was a controlled demolition. They said it was 11 and 9 seconds respectively and they are trying to sell the official story...you see, they are on YOUR side.
Because it's a forum where people debate right? I can respect your opinion as long as the facts to associate with it are correct. So far, many of you "facts" that you base your beliefs on have been shown to be wrong. Whether your man enough to admit that or not is up to you.You believe the official version...I don't nor will I ever buy this load of horseshit...you, on the other hand do buy the official version and I respect that. Why can't you respect MY right to no longer buy into what I believe is a load of horseshit?
I'm not offended in the least. I'm just here to present facts against your incorrect claims. Like I said before, you can believe anything you want as long as it's based on factual evidence. It's your "factual" evidence I have an issue with.Why does it offend your sense of decorum that I don't believe anything "da gubermint" tells me?
It doesn't. Why are you here then? Are you here to just spew your beliefs and leave or did you come here to debate? You started out with an open mind for discussion and when you had your facts and claims that were the foundation of your beliefs countered, you took a different tone.How does it affect you personally?
Again, I am not asking you to agree with what I believe. I am asking you to own up to the incorrect claims made in this thread. You have yet to do that. The 9.2 second collapse time is a perfect example. Will you continue to use that wrong information in the future or will you use the correct information?I have more than made my case as to why the official version reeks to high heaven...you have made your case as to how it doesn't. You are not going to "one up" me when it comes to this no matter how hard you try....let it go and move on because we are never going to agree.
It doesn't make one bit of difference which "side" they are on. Facts are facts. You have been shown that your 9.2 second collapse time was garbage. If you want to continue to spew it, that's up to you.And I have made it very clear that even if the NIST claimed that it was as much as twenty seconds before WTC 1 and 2 fell completely to the ground that it would not change my mind that it was a controlled demolition. They said it was 11 and 9 seconds respectively and they are trying to sell the official story...you see, they are on YOUR side.
Because it's a forum where people debate right? I can respect your opinion as long as the facts to associate with it are correct. So far, many of you "facts" that you base your beliefs on have been shown to be wrong. Whether your man enough to admit that or not is up to you.You believe the official version...I don't nor will I ever buy this load of horseshit...you, on the other hand do buy the official version and I respect that. Why can't you respect MY right to no longer buy into what I believe is a load of horseshit?
I'm not offended in the least. I'm just here to present facts against your incorrect claims. Like I said before, you can believe anything you want as long as it's based on factual evidence. It's your "factual" evidence I have an issue with.Why does it offend your sense of decorum that I don't believe anything "da gubermint" tells me?
It doesn't. Why are you here then? Are you here to just spew your beliefs and leave or did you come here to debate? You started out with an open mind for discussion and when you had your facts and claims that were the foundation of your beliefs countered, you took a different tone.How does it affect you personally?
Again, I am not asking you to agree with what I believe. I am asking you to own up to the incorrect claims made in this thread. You have yet to do that. The 9.2 second collapse time is a perfect example. Will you continue to use that wrong information in the future or will you use the correct information?I have more than made my case as to why the official version reeks to high heaven...you have made your case as to how it doesn't. You are not going to "one up" me when it comes to this no matter how hard you try....let it go and move on because we are never going to agree.
It doesn't make one bit of difference which "side" they are on. Facts are facts. You have been shown that your 9.2 second collapse time was garbage. If you want to continue to spew it, that's up to you.And I have made it very clear that even if the NIST claimed that it was as much as twenty seconds before WTC 1 and 2 fell completely to the ground that it would not change my mind that it was a controlled demolition. They said it was 11 and 9 seconds respectively and they are trying to sell the official story...you see, they are on YOUR side.
Because it's a forum where people debate right? I can respect your opinion as long as the facts to associate with it are correct. So far, many of you "facts" that you base your beliefs on have been shown to be wrong. Whether your man enough to admit that or not is up to you.You believe the official version...I don't nor will I ever buy this load of horseshit...you, on the other hand do buy the official version and I respect that. Why can't you respect MY right to no longer buy into what I believe is a load of horseshit?
I'm not offended in the least. I'm just here to present facts against your incorrect claims. Like I said before, you can believe anything you want as long as it's based on factual evidence. It's your "factual" evidence I have an issue with.Why does it offend your sense of decorum that I don't believe anything "da gubermint" tells me?
It doesn't. Why are you here then? Are you here to just spew your beliefs and leave or did you come here to debate? You started out with an open mind for discussion and when you had your facts and claims that were the foundation of your beliefs countered, you took a different tone.How does it affect you personally?
Again, I am not asking you to agree with what I believe. I am asking you to own up to the incorrect claims made in this thread. You have yet to do that. The 9.2 second collapse time is a perfect example. Will you continue to use that wrong information in the future or will you use the correct information?I have more than made my case as to why the official version reeks to high heaven...you have made your case as to how it doesn't. You are not going to "one up" me when it comes to this no matter how hard you try....let it go and move on because we are never going to agree.
NIST claims that WTC 1 collapsed in 11 seconds and WTC2 9 seconds which is under the 9.2 seconds that I claimed.......what more do you want?
Dale,NIST claims that WTC 1 collapsed in 11 seconds and WTC2 9 seconds which is under the 9.2 seconds that I claimed.......what more do you want?
Get over it........I don't give a flying fuck about even a 10 second discrepancy....the Manhattan buildings were filled with explosives designed to bring them down....believe what you wish to believe but you will never change my mind at all..
