WTC building 7

[eots]

...but to just post inane denials is really pathetic

Then again, maybe not. Think about it. If 911ij is right about some of these posers, maybe they're getting paid by response count, as opposed to word count or quality of content, in which case one-liner inanity could be very lucrative!

 

[Hollie]

There was no CD speculation is not evidence

its the only way to explain a symmetrical free fall collapse...

You twoofers manufacture an explanation and then invent data to support the conspiracy laden conjecture.

what evidence was manufactured,,what data invented..can you support anything you say?

I've yet to read a coherent argument for your conspiracy theories. Peer reviewed by peer twoofers is not in any way peer reviewed.

...but to just post inane denials is really pathetic

Then again, maybe not. If 911ij is right about some these posers, maybe they're getting paid by response count, as opposed to word count or quality of content...

its hard to imagine what else could motivate one to just post inane repeated denials,truly

It's a simple matter to deny the conspiracy theories of you Alex Jones groupies. You quacks are a decade and a half past 9/11 and still failing to present a credible argument for your silly conspiracy theories.

Those few quacks like you who are still cutting and pasting goofy YouTube videos are relying on dated, refuted and carelessly edited "home movies" that convinced no one.

The Twoofer cult was a laughable joke a decade ago. It's now a repository for the worst elements of the emotionally crippled conspiracy theory loons.

 

[eots]

its the only way to explain a symmetrical free fall collapse...

Conspiracy theories don't explain anything. They're formatted to ask questions and suggest a dark, ulterior motive. Just as all your other conspiracy theories do.

its not conspiracy theory it is physics and peer reviewed science

Your "alternate reality" physics only seems resolvable by the Alex Jones types you're in thrall to.

you say that yet you know its false..you are fully aware many esteemed physicist that support controlled demolition ..that has been well established to any rational person and all you have offered to refute them is NIST and "sciences buffs" that are actually at times contradicting the NIST report to try and refute these facts is one thing but to just post inane denials is really pathetic

its the only way to explain a symmetrical free fall collapse...

Conspiracy theories don't explain anything. They're formatted to ask questions and suggest a dark, ulterior motive. Just as all your other conspiracy theories do.

its not conspiracy theory it is physics and peer reviewed science

Your "alternate reality" physics only seems resolvable by the Alex Jones types you're in thrall to.

you say that yet you know its false..you are fully aware many esteemed physicist that support controlled demolition ..that has been well established to any rational person and all you have offered to refute them is NIST and "sciences buffs" that are actually at times contradicting the NIST report to try and refute these facts is one thing but to just post inane denials is really pathetic

While you are in denial of contingent reality, your "esteemed Physicists" and the entire Twoofer cult has been marginalized and refuted for a decade now. The Twoofer has been relegated to a conspiracy theory fad that has run its course. Your silly "controlled demolition" conspiracy is no more credible now than it was more than a decade ago when introduced by the quacks and charlatans you gullible types worship.

This helps explain the personality type that so willingly mouths the bait of conspiracy theories:
Six really stupid 9 11 conspiracies debunked in about six seconds

PSYCHOLOGISTS will tell you that even perfectly sane people have the ability to accept wild conspiracy theories. The more powerless or alone we feel, the more likely we are to develop such theories.

It's all linked to self-esteem. If you're the sort of person who feels isolated or disenfranchised, you're much more likely to develop wild theories as a way of making you seem more knowledgeable, more powerful, more special.

Your link as usual is a non-accredited person creating strawmen most of which are not even related to the NIST report

 

[Hollie]

...but to just post inane denials is really pathetic

Then again, maybe not. Think about it. If 911ij is right about some of these posers, maybe they're getting paid by response count, as opposed to word count or quality of content, in which case one-liner inanity could be very lucrative!

View attachment 40770

Typical for the Alex Jones cultists. You have no credible arguments so you're left to cut and paste spam.

 

[Hollie]

Conspiracy theories don't explain anything. They're formatted to ask questions and suggest a dark, ulterior motive. Just as all your other conspiracy theories do.

its not conspiracy theory it is physics and peer reviewed science

Your "alternate reality" physics only seems resolvable by the Alex Jones types you're in thrall to.

you say that yet you know its false..you are fully aware many esteemed physicist that support controlled demolition ..that has been well established to any rational person and all you have offered to refute them is NIST and "sciences buffs" that are actually at times contradicting the NIST report to try and refute these facts is one thing but to just post inane denials is really pathetic

Conspiracy theories don't explain anything. They're formatted to ask questions and suggest a dark, ulterior motive. Just as all your other conspiracy theories do.

its not conspiracy theory it is physics and peer reviewed science

Your "alternate reality" physics only seems resolvable by the Alex Jones types you're in thrall to.

you say that yet you know its false..you are fully aware many esteemed physicist that support controlled demolition ..that has been well established to any rational person and all you have offered to refute them is NIST and "sciences buffs" that are actually at times contradicting the NIST report to try and refute these facts is one thing but to just post inane denials is really pathetic

While you are in denial of contingent reality, your "esteemed Physicists" and the entire Twoofer cult has been marginalized and refuted for a decade now. The Twoofer has been relegated to a conspiracy theory fad that has run its course. Your silly "controlled demolition" conspiracy is no more credible now than it was more than a decade ago when introduced by the quacks and charlatans you gullible types worship.

This helps explain the personality type that so willingly mouths the bait of conspiracy theories:
Six really stupid 9 11 conspiracies debunked in about six seconds

PSYCHOLOGISTS will tell you that even perfectly sane people have the ability to accept wild conspiracy theories. The more powerless or alone we feel, the more likely we are to develop such theories.

It's all linked to self-esteem. If you're the sort of person who feels isolated or disenfranchised, you're much more likely to develop wild theories as a way of making you seem more knowledgeable, more powerful, more special.

Your link as usual is a non-accredited person creating strawmen most of which are not even related to the NIST report

The link specifically addresses the failure of the Twoofer cultists.

Have you mistakenly thought that Alex Jones was a credible mouth piece for you cultists?

 

[eots]

its the only way to explain a symmetrical free fall collapse...

You twoofers manufacture an explanation and then invent data to support the conspiracy laden conjecture.

what evidence was manufactured,,what data invented..can you support anything you say?

I've yet to read a coherent argument for your conspiracy theories. Peer reviewed by peer twoofers is not in any way peer reviewed.

...but to just post inane denials is really pathetic

Then again, maybe not. If 911ij is right about some these posers, maybe they're getting paid by response count, as opposed to word count or quality of content...

its hard to imagine what else could motivate one to just post inane repeated denials,truly

It's a simple matter to deny the conspiracy theories of you Alex Jones groupies. You quacks are a decade and a half past 9/11 and still failing to present a credible argument for your silly conspiracy theories.

Those few quacks like you who are still cutting and pasting goofy YouTube videos are relying on dated, refuted and carelessly edited "home movies" that convinced no one.

The Twoofer cult was a laughable joke a decade ago. It's now a repository for the worst elements of the emotionally crippled conspiracy theory loons.

you cut and paste science buffs that list enjoying reading fantasy as their bio to dispute NASA engineers..you are laughable

 

[Hollie]

You twoofers manufacture an explanation and then invent data to support the conspiracy laden conjecture.

what evidence was manufactured,,what data invented..can you support anything you say?

I've yet to read a coherent argument for your conspiracy theories. Peer reviewed by peer twoofers is not in any way peer reviewed.

...but to just post inane denials is really pathetic

Then again, maybe not. If 911ij is right about some these posers, maybe they're getting paid by response count, as opposed to word count or quality of content...

its hard to imagine what else could motivate one to just post inane repeated denials,truly

It's a simple matter to deny the conspiracy theories of you Alex Jones groupies. You quacks are a decade and a half past 9/11 and still failing to present a credible argument for your silly conspiracy theories.

Those few quacks like you who are still cutting and pasting goofy YouTube videos are relying on dated, refuted and carelessly edited "home movies" that convinced no one.

The Twoofer cult was a laughable joke a decade ago. It's now a repository for the worst elements of the emotionally crippled conspiracy theory loons.

you cut and paste science buffs that list enjoying reading fantasy as there bio to dispute NASA engineers..you are laughable

It's a simple matter to review the thread and identify you twoofers as the cut and pasters. Your silly YouTube videos are now a decade and a half old and are just as pointless now as then. It's remarkable that you continue the Twoofer charade when the twoofer cult has been silenced and dismissed for a decade now. You Alex Jones groupies have been regurgitating the same tired and refuted claims - all the same nonsense that has been exposed as quackery a decade ago.

 

[eots]

from your self professed science buff

You've got 110 storeys of rubble pummelling a 47-storey building, setting it on fire, covering it in untold extra weight and inflicted untold stresses. And later that day, when the smaller building collapses, it's obvious the CIA did it with explosives. And Elvis left the building right before it happened.

this is in contradiction with NIST that says the building was essentially sound and fire was the cause of collapse and not "untold extra weight and inflicted untold stresses."

 

[eots]

Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng– Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden. Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award and the Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988). Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986). Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000. Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers. Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology. 37 year NASA career.

• Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:
  "The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Center]." http://www.ae911truth.org

but he has been debunked by hollies science buff who enjoys reading...lol

 

[Hollie]

9/11 Truth movement

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Truth_movement

Adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement are conspiracy theorists who dispute the mainstream account of the September 11 attacks of 2001. The "truthers", as they are, sometimes pejoratively,[1][2] called, dispute the commonly accepted account that Al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four airliners, crashed them into the Pentagon and New York's Twin Towers, whereupon the crashes led to the collapse of the Twin Towers. "Truthers" primarily focus on what they claim are significant inconsistencies in that explanation, suggesting at the least a cover-up and, at least, complicity by insiders.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]

 

[eots]

9/11 Truth movement

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Truth_movement

Adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement are conspiracy theorists who dispute the mainstream account of the September 11 attacks of 2001. The "truthers", as they are, sometimes pejoratively,[1][2] called, dispute the commonly accepted account that Al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four airliners, crashed them into the Pentagon and New York's Twin Towers, whereupon the crashes led to the collapse of the Twin Towers. "Truthers" primarily focus on what they claim are significant inconsistencies in that explanation, suggesting at the least a cover-up and, at least, complicity by insiders.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]

Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng– Former Director, Aerospace Projects,

 

[Hollie]

Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng– Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden. Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award and the Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988). Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986). Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000. Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers. Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology. 37 year NASA career.

• Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:
  "The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Center]." http://www.ae911truth.org

but he has been debunked by hollies science buff who enjoys reading...lol

Twoofers unite.

And yet for all your cutting and pasting, not a single, credible bit of support to pull your Twoofer conspiracy theories from the polluted backwater of Alex Jones lunacy.

 

[Hollie]

9/11 Truth movement

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Truth_movement

Adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement are conspiracy theorists who dispute the mainstream account of the September 11 attacks of 2001. The "truthers", as they are, sometimes pejoratively,[1][2] called, dispute the commonly accepted account that Al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four airliners, crashed them into the Pentagon and New York's Twin Towers, whereupon the crashes led to the collapse of the Twin Towers. "Truthers" primarily focus on what they claim are significant inconsistencies in that explanation, suggesting at the least a cover-up and, at least, complicity by insiders.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]

Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng– Former Director, Aerospace Projects,

Twoofers. Advancing conspiracy theories one YouTube video at a time.

 

[eots]

Indeed youtube and the world wide web, amazing is it not
we can sit in on university history lectures in Switzerland through youtube for anyone with some discretion youtube is an real information revolution

 

[Hollie]

Indeed. YouTube has become quite the medium for social misfits, conspiracy theory loons and twoofers who worship at the altar of Alex Jones.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

someone farted in here.^

 

[daws101]

I can imagine that the WTC building was such as the boat Titanic, "unsinkable".

what the hell is that supposed to mean ?

It was so solid-----seemed so strong------LOOMED over all of Manhattan

explosive demolitions can do that to a building strong or not

There was no CD speculation is not evidence

its the only way to explain a symmetrical free fall collapse...

false ,it's the only way you'll accept in your fantasy...reality is not so easy.

 

[daws101]

NIST has no evidence to support its progressive collapse theory

really? then what's this? :
6. What caused the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2?

Based on its comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large number of jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius, or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York City Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.

for 2.5 seconds-----the CALCULATED velocity of the fall was consistent with
FREE FALL-------that's it-------eodtiot stakes his entire "philosophy" on observation and calculation of a 2.5 second interval? . sheeeeesh

Not just any "2.5 second interval" Rosie; those were 2.25 seconds during which the building's "facade" descended symmetrically for about 105 ft. against zero resistance to the downward motion. That means something on the order of 8 floors were completely removed from the path of descent, either simultaneously or in rapid enough succession to circumvent the resistance that would have otherwise been in effect. The fire-induced progressive collapse model holds no explanatory power for a single inch of that 105+ ft. freefall descent; which is why accepting NIST's explanation is tantamount to rejecting the third law of motion. The significance of that measly "2.5 second interval" can't be overstated.

Bullshit you assholes over state its importance constantly.
its the linchpin of your fantasy.

Its over 100 ft of free fall..hardly measly

again only in your fantasy reality is another thing altogether.

 

[daws101]

It was so solid-----seemed so strong------LOOMED over all of Manhattan

explosive demolitions can do that to a building strong or not

There was no CD speculation is not evidence

its the only way to explain a symmetrical free fall collapse...

You twoofers manufacture an explanation and then invent data to support the conspiracy laden conjecture.

what evidence was manufactured,,what data invented..can you support anything you say?

right

Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone assessed that the movement "gives supporters of Bush an excuse to dismiss critics of this administration", and expressed concerns about the number of people who believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories.[111]

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) engineering professor Thomas W. Eagar was at first unwilling to acknowledge the concerns of the movement, saying "if (the argument) gets too mainstream, I'll engage in the debate." In response to Steven E. Jones publication of a hypothesis that the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition, Eagar said that adherents of the 9/11 Truth movement would use the reverse scientific method to arrive at their conclusions, as they "determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their conclusion, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion".[112]

Calling conspiracy theorists "the truthers", Bill Moyers has quoted journalist Robert Parry by stating that the theorists "...threw out all the evidence of al-Qaeda's involvement, from contemporaneous calls from hijack victims on the planes to confessions from al-Qaeda leaders both in and out of captivity that they had indeed done it. Then, recycling some of the right's sophistry techniques, such as using long lists of supposed evidence to overcome the lack of any real evidence, the 'truthers' cherry-picked a few supposed 'anomalies' to build an 'inside-job' story line".[113]

Al Qaeda has sharply criticized Iran's ex-president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, over his suggestions that the U.S. government was behind the September 11 attacks, dismissing his comments as "ridiculous".[114]

Some skeptics, who oppose conspiracy as the a-priori explanation to events, and who find most of the questions posed by the Truthers to be either easily answered[115] or based on misleading or false facts[116] have claimed that some of the Truthers are knowingly disseminating false information, with no care for the grieving families, and accordingly called them "disrespectful" or even "sickos".[117]

 

[daws101]