9/11 Omission Hearings

[Gamolon]

I am not saying that 9/11 was an inside job.

There is still much to be learned. I post information to add other streams of thought to the issue. Of course others can do the same.

And you show no signs of learning anything. You post your evidence and claims, we refute it, then you change he subject. You never debate anything.

Case in point. You post bullshit about the columns being cut in the twin towers. Evidence was posted to show you that they were cut by torches during cleanup. You ignore that and move on to another claim.

Yet you tag me as someone who "doesn't want to learn".

What a joke.

Anyone familiar with cutting torches knows that the side of the torch is clean and the side away from the torch has all the slag. If you look at the center beam in this picture you will see slag on the outside. That would mean that the person with the torch would have to be inside the beam. I find that highly unlikely.

Really. Do you see slag on the OUTSIDE of the left side of that column? I don't. The only place I see slag on the outside is the front. Are you telling me that the person operating the torch could have slipped the head inside the column to make the last cut, from the inside thus forming slag on the outside front??? Let me guess. You would rather have the person stand in front of the column and make the last cut and possibly have that column slide on top of them? Isn't that right?

Another thing. Why are there "grooves" in the plate, 45 degrees to the face of the plate used to make that column. Look at the red lines in the following picture. How does a thermite/explosive shape charge, set parallel to the face of a metal plate make 45 degree "gooves"???

Also. for the building to fall straight down all the beams would have to fail at the exact same time otherwise it would fall over to one side. The chances that all the beams experienced the same heat for the same amount of time and have the same damage to their insulation is zero. You can try to spin that any way you want but it cannot happen.

You mean you don't see the upper "block" of the twin towers "tilt" before it fell? Straight down eh? Do I need to get into loads and stresses with you also now?

 

[Patriot911]

Anyone familiar with cutting torches knows that the side of the torch is clean and the side away from the torch has all the slag. If you look at the center beam in this picture you will see slag on the outside. That would mean that the person with the torch would have to be inside the beam. I find that highly unlikely.

So it is your OPINION that it is highly unlikely, and you can't actually make any claim as to what it actually WAS. We know it wasn't thermate, thermite or explosives as they don't produce a cut anything at ALL like what is shown above.

Also. for the building to fall straight down all the beams would have to fail at the exact same time otherwise it would fall over to one side.

This is flat out WRONG. In order for a building to fall on it's side, all the structures on three sides would have to fail and the other side would have to be able to SUSTAIN THE ENTIRE WEIGHT OF THE BUILDING instead of just that side. The bigger the building, the more weight you have, and the more impossible it becomes for the building to fall to one side.

The chances that all the beams experienced the same heat for the same amount of time and have the same damage to their insulation is zero. You can try to spin that any way you want but it cannot happen.

You're right. That is highly unlikely. Unfortunately, basing conclusions on bad initial assumptions caused bad conclusions. It is called garbage in / garbage out.

 

[Gamolon]

Hey P F? What's this guy doing?

Looks like he could fit that torch inside the column to cut that last part to the left eh?

 

[Gamolon]

Yeah. It didn't tilt. Not one bit.

 

[Gamolon]

P F, you say there was slag on the outside of the column.

Number 1 in the photo points to no slag on the outside.
Number 2 points to slag on the inside.
Number 3 points to slag on the outside.

I say they cut from the outside at number 1, number 2, and opposite from number 1. Nunber three was cut from the inside after the first three.

What's your explanation?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Hey P F? What's this guy doing?

Looks like he could fit that torch inside the column to cut that last part to the left eh?

OK, good point.

 

[Gamolon]

Also. for the building to fall straight down all the beams would have to fail at the exact same time otherwise it would fall over to one side. The chances that all the beams experienced the same heat for the same amount of time and have the same damage to their insulation is zero. You can try to spin that any way you want but it cannot happen.

Which building are you speaking of?

 

[P F Tinmore]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xppZpG_Nwck&feature=related]YouTube - ‪9/11 Omission Hearings - Indira Singh Reads Sibel Edmonds' Letter - 9/9/2004‬‏[/ame]

 

[Mr. Jones]

Also. for the building to fall straight down all the beams would have to fail at the exact same time otherwise it would fall over to one side. The chances that all the beams experienced the same heat for the same amount of time and have the same damage to their insulation is zero. You can try to spin that any way you want but it cannot happen.

This is what I have been saying. Sporadic, displaced damage, and fires, causing such near perfect symmetrical failure, and collapse, is one of the first things that should make one suspicious. Particularly in WTC 7.

 

[Patriot911]

Also. for the building to fall straight down all the beams would have to fail at the exact same time otherwise it would fall over to one side. The chances that all the beams experienced the same heat for the same amount of time and have the same damage to their insulation is zero. You can try to spin that any way you want but it cannot happen.

This is what I have been saying. Sporadic, displaced damage, and fires, causing such near perfect symmetrical failure, and collapse, is one of the first things that should make one suspicious. Particularly in WTC 7.

Except, as has been proven time and time again, that didn't happen. How many times do you have to have your hand held and have this explained to you? Oh wait. You're a fucktard. You know what happened, yet insist on lying about it. Just like you said there was no visible outside deformation despite the fact the entire penthouse collapsed INTO the building over where the vertical collapse progressed. We're suppose to pretend that didn't happen, right? You're such a joke and a fucking liar. It's no wonder you're such a piece of shit person. No moral character at all.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Also. for the building to fall straight down all the beams would have to fail at the exact same time otherwise it would fall over to one side. The chances that all the beams experienced the same heat for the same amount of time and have the same damage to their insulation is zero. You can try to spin that any way you want but it cannot happen.

This is what I have been saying. Sporadic, displaced damage, and fires, causing such near perfect symmetrical failure, and collapse, is one of the first things that should make one suspicious. Particularly in WTC 7.

Except, as has been proven time and time again, that didn't happen. How many times do you have to have your hand held and have this explained to you? Oh wait. You're a fucktard. You know what happened, yet insist on lying about it. Just like you said there was no visible outside deformation despite the fact the entire penthouse collapsed INTO the building over where the vertical collapse progressed. We're suppose to pretend that didn't happen, right? You're such a joke and a fucking liar. It's no wonder you're such a piece of shit person. No moral character at all.

You're the one that needs to be walked through the explanations.
When people refer to the "near symmetrical" collapse of the WTC 7, they generally are talking about the 47 story part of the building that they have watched go straight down.
But we're supposed to pretend THAT didn't happen?
Simply because the penthouse fell into it first??
Trying to confuse this by mentioning the penthouse falling into the building first, does not in anyway change the fact the rest of the building, the main part of the 47 story structure fell straight down..
The damage does not jive with the collapse scenario.
And again the penthouse being used to say that this was outside deformation is disingenuous, as the whole thing underneath it came straight down essentially, and showed no obvious hint it was going to prior to that.
But then trying to twist shit up to fit the NIST and OCT version is what you are here for, and you try to do everything possible to advance that ridiculous crap. This despite you admitting on this forum that "we don't know everything" and "sure..NIST could be wrong"

 

[P F Tinmore]

And, of course, what happened is not as important as the politics of how it happened and who did it.

 

[Patriot911]

You're the one that needs to be walked through the explanations.
When people refer to the "near symmetrical" collapse of the WTC 7, they generally are talking about the 47 story part of the building that they have watched go straight down.
But we're supposed to pretend THAT didn't happen?
Simply because the penthouse fell into it first??

Only an ignorant fool like you would be so stupid as to pretend that the only part of the collapse that matters or is relevant is the part you can see.

Trying to confuse this by mentioning the penthouse falling into the building first, does not in anyway change the fact the rest of the building, the main part of the 47 story structure fell straight down..

And which way would you have it fall? To the side? What is to push it to the side? Physics, my ignorant shitbag, demand that a force be used to move any object any direction. You had gravity pulling down. Now what is going to make the building fall over? Are you going to be so stupid as to pretend one side of the building is going to be strong enough to support the ENTIRE WEIGHT of the building in order to have it fall over? Yes, you probably will.

The damage does not jive with the collapse scenario.

Sure it does. It is only when someone is so arrogantly dishonest as you who pretends that ONLY the external collapse is the collapse that things don't add up. So how do you explain the collapse of the Penthouse? It just evaporated? You're going to pretend the penthouse collapse is not significant of other issues with the building? Do you have ANY clue just how fucking stupid you look when you pretend the penthouse is meaningless?

And again the penthouse being used to say that this was outside deformation is disingenuous, as the whole thing underneath it came straight down essentially, and showed no obvious hint it was going to prior to that.

PRETENDING the penthouse is not a part of the collapse just shows how fucking ignorant and dishonest you are. Like I said, you fucking truthtards ignore evidence that goes against your theories, so you pretend the penthouse doesn't matter and should be ignored. Sorry, but when an entire section of the building collapses before everything else, I would call that significant and worthy of study.

But no. Not you fucked up truthtards. Ignore the penthouse! It is just a distraction!

But then trying to twist shit up to fit the NIST and OCT version is what you are here for, and you try to do everything possible to advance that ridiculous crap.

Yet what did I have to twist? All I am doing is using ALL the known facts instead of pretending things didn't happen. Which is more honest? Making a theory fit all the facts or twisting the facts to fit a theory?

This despite you admitting on this forum that "we don't know everything" and "sure..NIST could be wrong"

So me being humble enough to know I could be wrong is somehow a character flaw? Wow. It makes sense that you, in your extreme arrogance, think that you are absolutely right no matter what information comes along. It explains your fucked up theories and why you must constantly lie to cover up your ignorance and the fact your bullshit does not fit the facts.

 

[Patriot911]

And, of course, what happened is not as important as the politics of how it happened and who did it.

Yet to date, the truthtards cannot agree on who did it or how it happened or why. How is that possible? You can't ALL be right, yet you insist everyone who believes Al Qaeda was responsible is wrong and everyone ELSE is right. You claim Cheney was behind the attacks, yet never say a word when someone says it is Bush, the Jews, the Illuminati or anyone else.

Do you not see the hypocricy of the truthtard bowel movement?

 

[Mr. Jones]

You're the one that needs to be walked through the explanations.
When people refer to the "near symmetrical" collapse of the WTC 7, they generally are talking about the 47 story part of the building that they have watched go straight down.
But we're supposed to pretend THAT didn't happen?
Simply because the penthouse fell into it first??

Only an ignorant fool like you would be so stupid as to pretend that the only part of the collapse that matters or is relevant is the part you can see.

I'm not saying that asshole. The argument was about the lack of deformation on the outside of the building, and how you constantly using the penthouse as proof of that is a false argument you create to purposefully side track the real point and intent of what is being said. It is so obvious to anyone who pays attention to how you respond, yet you think we don't see this!?

Trying to confuse this by mentioning the penthouse falling into the building first, does not in anyway change the fact the rest of the building, the main part of the 47 story structure fell straight down..

And which way would you have it fall? To the side? What is to push it to the side? Physics, my ignorant shitbag, demand that a force be used to move any object any direction. You had gravity pulling down. Now what is going to make the building fall over? Are you going to be so stupid as to pretend one side of the building is going to be strong enough to support the ENTIRE WEIGHT of the building in order to have it fall over? Yes, you probably will.

Your statement here is so stupid, because you completely ignore the ability of steel to dissipate heat.
The fires intensity were not at the same parts of the building AT THE SAME FUCKING TIME to cause the symmetrical straight down collapse you fucking moron.
Only parts of the building were on fire, therefore anyone with a brain and thinking ability will reason those parts would have moved/deformed first for example, the floors that were on fire. Get it now, you ignorant fuck?

Sure it does. It is only when someone is so arrogantly dishonest as you who pretends that ONLY the external collapse is the collapse that things don't add up. So how do you explain the collapse of the Penthouse? It just evaporated? You're going to pretend the penthouse collapse is not significant of other issues with the building? Do you have ANY clue just how fucking stupid you look when you pretend the penthouse is meaningless?

I never said, nor do I pretend to portray the penthouse is meaningless, that is just your opinion and obvious attempt to sidetrack the point once again. The argument is about the LACK OF DEFORMATIONS on the MAIN PART of the building, while all this INTERNAL COLLAPSING WAS ALLEGEDLY TAKING PLACE!

PRETENDING the penthouse is not a part of the collapse just shows how fucking ignorant and dishonest you are. Like I said, you fucking truthtards ignore evidence that goes against your theories, so you pretend the penthouse doesn't matter and should be ignored. Sorry, but when an entire section of the building collapses before everything else, I would call that significant and worthy of study.

You pretending that I'm pretending that the penthouse is not part of the collapse just shows how fucking ignorant and dishonest YOU are.

But no. Not you fucked up truthtards. Ignore the penthouse! It is just a distraction!

Again making up lies to suit your needs

But then trying to twist shit up to fit the NIST and OCT version is what you are here for, and you try to do everything possible to advance that ridiculous crap.

Yet what did I have to twist? All I am doing is using ALL the known facts instead of pretending things didn't happen. Which is more honest? Making a theory fit all the facts or twisting the facts to fit a theory?

You twisted up and generalizing what the intent was above for starters. BTW, it is NIST that made up facts to fit their theory, and this has been proven by the skeptics and linked, discussed and pointed out to you and yours many times, but it is you that ignores these facts.

This despite you admitting on this forum that "we don't know everything" and "sure..NIST could be wrong"

So me being humble enough to know I could be wrong is somehow a character flaw? Wow. It makes sense that you, in your extreme arrogance, think that you are absolutely right no matter what information comes along. It explains your fucked up theories and why you must constantly lie to cover up your ignorance and the fact your bullshit does not fit the facts.

You aren't humble nor do you know the meaning of the word. One of your many character flaws is you are a hypocrite, and my point proves this.
You say the above remarks, while postulating you are a Patriot and searching for the truth, however admitting the above, you make no effort to be interested in looking for the truth as a responsible patriotic citizen would do. And a debate and disagreement is usually based on 2 side not agreeing with the facts, you asshole.
NIST and those who believe them are basing the legitimacy of their facts on them being an authority and mouth piece of the government, who has been caught lying and is corrupt, and the other side does not agree with based on their facts that NIST and ignorant assholes like you ignore and can't explain, without resorting to said questionable facts! The fritloop game you enjoy playing!

In other words NIST got their facts wrong, either in error, or by deliberately lying, therefore their theory, (the one you admit to having the capability of being wrong) IS wrong.

Why don't you point out what part of the NIST theory they "might" have gotten wrong?

You instead talk out both sides of your disgusting mouth, saying we don't know the truth, and NIST could be wrong but they are STILL right according to their questionable facts!!
You never cease to amaze at your capacity to lie, distort, and con volute, and be the most hypocritical troll in existence.

 

[Patriot911]

You're the one that needs to be walked through the explanations.
When people refer to the "near symmetrical" collapse of the WTC 7, they generally are talking about the 47 story part of the building that they have watched go straight down.
But we're supposed to pretend THAT didn't happen?
Simply because the penthouse fell into it first??

Only an ignorant fool like you would be so stupid as to pretend that the only part of the collapse that matters or is relevant is the part you can see.

I'm not saying that asshole.

Sure you are. You want everyone to ignore everything but what you want to focus on; i.e. the supposed non-deformation of ONLY THE WALLS, but not the whole building.

The argument was about the lack of deformation on the outside of the building, and how you constantly using the penthouse as proof of that is a false argument you create to purposefully side track the real point and intent of what is being said. It is so obvious to anyone who pays attention to how you respond, yet you think we don't see this!?

Wrong again, Fucktard Jones. I look at the ENTIRETY of the event, not just the pieces you want to focus on. You claim that because you didn't see any deformations that there couldn't have been an internal collapse.

Look closer, specifically at the 10 second mark.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus]YouTube - ‪WTC 7 Explosion‬‏[/ame]

See all the windows on the left hand side being blown out BEFORE the collapse and coinciding with the collapse of the Penthouse? It shows there was indeed a vertical collapse running up the side of the building just prior to the total collapse.

Your statement here is so stupid, because you completely ignore the ability of steel to dissipate heat.

What the FUCK does that have to do with how much weight the supports can hold up? In order for a building to tip over, the supports on that side of the building MUST support the entire weight of the building until the center of gravity of the building moves outside the footprint of the building or the building has no alternative but to collapse straight down.

This article is discussing the towers, but the same is true for every building.

Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.

The fires intensity were not at the same parts of the building AT THE SAME FUCKING TIME to cause the symmetrical straight down collapse you fucking moron.

Who says the fires had to be in the same parts of the building at the same fucking time? Oh yeah. Ignorant fucks like you who pretend that is the only way a collapse can happen!

Only parts of the building were on fire, therefore anyone with a brain and thinking ability will reason those parts would have moved/deformed first for example, the floors that were on fire. Get it now, you ignorant fuck?

Yes, I get that you are an ignorant fuck. You prove that time and time again. Take this bullshit claim, for instance. You pretend that the only time steel deforms is when it is heating up. This is NOT true. The steel has two chances to deform; when heating up and when cooling down. This is a known fact. Temperature differences as low as 300 degrees from one side to another on a steel beam can cause significant warping either during or after the fire as the steel cools.

And remember, it is only your lameassed theory that says everything had to fail at once. According to the NIST theory, only column 79 had to collapse to initiate a global collapse.

I never said, nor do I pretend to portray the penthouse is meaningless, that is just your opinion and obvious attempt to sidetrack the point once again. The argument is about the LACK OF DEFORMATIONS on the MAIN PART of the building, while all this INTERNAL COLLAPSING WAS ALLEGEDLY TAKING PLACE!

So why do you insist on ignoring the penthouse collapsing? Whether or not the external facade deforms is immaterial as you can not prove it SHOULD have deformed. That would only be your opinion and we all know how worthless that is. So what you are asking to do is accept your OPINION as evidence when it should be treated like the bullshit it is.

You pretending that I'm pretending that the penthouse is not part of the collapse just shows how fucking ignorant and dishonest YOU are.

Then why do you insist on ignoring it and ONLY focusing on the deformation of the outside walls? What explanation do you have other than an internal collapse to explain why the penthouse disappeared into the building? YOU claim an internal collapse could not have been happening, yet you ignore the evidence of that very thing happening.

Again making up lies to suit your needs

Really? So where have you addressed the penthouse and it's roll in determining the sequence of events?

You twisted up and generalizing what the intent was above for starters. BTW, it is NIST that made up facts to fit their theory, and this has been proven by the skeptics and linked, discussed and pointed out to you and yours many times, but it is you that ignores these facts.

So name the facts they twisted to fit their theory? Their theory explains the penthouse and the windows blowing out and the kink and the freefall acceleration for 2.25 seconds and how the collapse could have started from a single point of failure. THEIR theory fits ALL the facts. Your theory only fits your opinions and ASSumptions of what happened.

So me being humble enough to know I could be wrong is somehow a character flaw? Wow. It makes sense that you, in your extreme arrogance, think that you are absolutely right no matter what information comes along. It explains your fucked up theories and why you must constantly lie to cover up your ignorance and the fact your bullshit does not fit the facts.

You aren't humble nor do you know the meaning of the word. One of your many character flaws is you are a hypocrite, and my point proves this.

Which point would that be? That I can admit my mistakes and am willing to alter my beliefs to fit the evidence but you'll go down in a flaming pile of shit before admitting a mistake? That point is blazingly clear.

You say the above remarks, while postulating you are a Patriot and searching for the truth, however admitting the above, you make no effort to be interested in looking for the truth as a responsible patriotic citizen would do.

Sure I do. It is just that, unlike a piece of shit tratiorous dog like you, I demand evidence before I start accusing people. You do it based on opinion and ASSumptions that are all based on lies and bullshit. So which is more responsible? Basing one's belief on the evidence or basing one's beliefs on ones assumptions that IGNORE the evidence?

And a debate and disagreement is usually based on 2 side not agreeing with the facts, you asshole.

Yet there is only one truth. We can't both be right. Therefore one of us is dead wrong. Let's see.... I have all the evidence..... you have dick. I look at all the facts. You ignore everything that doesn't fit your theory. I rely on authorities trusted world wide to be right. You rely on people who rely on fucking idiots like you for their living or people as delusional as you are or worse. Gee. This isn't hard to figure out.

NIST and those who believe them are basing the legitimacy of their facts on them being an authority and mouth piece of the government, who has been caught lying and is corrupt, and the other side does not agree with based on their facts that NIST and ignorant assholes like you ignore and can't explain, without resorting to said questionable facts! The fritloop game you enjoy playing!

Wrong yet again you lying piece of shit! The NIST has NOTHING to do with being a mouth piece for the government. They don't set policy. They don't confirm or deny who was responsible for 9/11. All they do is report what happened to the best of their ability and using every resource they have. Hundreds of engineers from numerous agencies and societies worked on the NIST reports. The reports have been examined world wide because other governments set codes based on NIST recommendations and engineers use NIST recommendations to build safer buildings. It's not about politics but about safety with them. Yes, we realize you fucktards think anything and everything dealing with the government all has some evil borg like mentality, but the truth brands you all seriously deranged.

In other words NIST got their facts wrong, either in error, or by deliberately lying, therefore their theory, (the one you admit to having the capability of being wrong) IS wrong.

The only way it can be wrong is if evidence is presented that the facts the NIST was working on were wrong or that there is an aspect they did not take into account. You have yet to produce one iota of evidence that is real and not some jackass's opinion.

Why don't you point out what part of the NIST theory they "might" have gotten wrong?

Can't. Nobody has presented evidence they are materially wrong in their assessment. I sure as hell haven't seen any real evidence out of you. I said the possibility exists, not that I know of a flaw in their theory. You should learn how to read better. You keep embarassing yourself by fucking up.

You instead talk out both sides of your disgusting mouth, saying we don't know the truth, and NIST could be wrong but they are STILL right according to their questionable facts!!

Their facts are only "questioned" by you ignorant fuckers. You have yet to present evidence the facts are wrong or that there are facts that were not taken into account. When you actually produce evidence and not opinion, then we can talk. Until then you and all your truthtard buddies are just talking out your ass.

You never cease to amaze at your capacity to lie, distort, and con volute, and be the most hypocritical troll in existence.

More meaningless bullshit from you. You're just pissed off because you've been beaten yet again. Maybe when you grow up you can play with the big dogs. In the mean time, you're still just kitty litter; smelly, foul, and used to shit on.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Only an ignorant fool like you would be so stupid as to pretend that the only part of the collapse that matters or is relevant is the part you can see.

I'm not saying that asshole.

Sure you are. You want everyone to ignore everything but what you want to focus on; i.e. the supposed non-deformation of ONLY THE WALLS, but not the whole building.

You want people to ignore the fact the building came straight down with no obvious deformations in the main structure, after "burning" for 8 hours.
Column 79...the weak link to the whole thing according to NIST, then the sudden onset of collapse. It is not feasible to assume that all this destruction was taking place in such a rapid order inside, to cause this straight down collapse, without a clue, and remove enough material to cause the 2.25 secs of free fall, all at once, without seriously looking into other causes, which they didn't.

Wrong again, Fucktard Jones. I look at the ENTIRETY of the event, not just the pieces you want to focus on. You claim that because you didn't see any deformations that there couldn't have been an internal collapse.

If you honestly did look at the entire event like you say, then you would have to be amazed at the ridiculous explanation NIST gives, and how highly improbable it would be, without some other cause, other then sporadic fires, and crazy scenarios.
You only look at what they present, because that is what you are locked into focus on.

Look closer, specifically at the 10 second mark.

YouTube - ‪WTC 7 Explosion‬‏

See all the windows on the left hand side being blown out BEFORE the collapse and coinciding with the collapse of the Penthouse? It shows there was indeed a vertical collapse running up the side of the building just prior to the total collapse.

Looks like a building being demolished by means other then sporadic fires on certain floors. A building that enough material was removed to cause 2.25 secs. of free fall, that NIST didn't want to admit to, because of their prior statement, that basically said "no free fall occurred because resistance would have had to be removed if that was the case, and we didn't see that" or in so many words.

What the FUCK does that have to do with how much weight the supports can hold up? In order for a building to tip over, the supports on that side of the building MUST support the entire weight of the building until the center of gravity of the building moves outside the footprint of the building or the building has no alternative but to collapse straight down.

Huh? Why are you mentioning the weight?? I didn't, I simply said sporadic damage should not have caused symmetrical and global collapse? Do you not know about the ability of steel to dissapate heat and the implications it has on the collapse explanation? I guess not.

Who says the fires had to be in the same parts of the building at the same fucking time? Oh yeah. Ignorant fucks like you who pretend that is the only way a collapse can happen!

Again you show what a dumbass you are and that you are the ignorant one here! In order for the building to come down as it did, almost perfect symmetry - and experience the 100ft. free fall in 2.25 sec., resistance in the form of material has to be removed, at strategic points at the same time, other wise a building will come down in a staggered fashion.

You're too ignorant to think this through and quick to ignore this fact. The parts that give way are not going to be the same thermal temps, because of steels ability to dissipate heat asshole! Remember these fires were not on all the floors, or on all the load bearing points at the same time!
Even more insane then to offer that as an explanation is that these temps would have to be the same or nearly the same at the same time to cause such a symmetrical collapse! What the fuck, can't you understand what the hell you read ?? You are intentionally making shit up again, so you don't have to address the point made. It's a common tactic you employ.

Yes, I get that you are an ignorant fuck. You prove that time and time again. Take this bullshit claim, for instance. You pretend that the only time steel deforms is when it is heating up.

Here we have another case in point where this fucking troll, insists I said something I didn't so he can knock it down with ease. I challenge you right now you lying son of a bitch to quote exactly where I said this? Or even implied this?
Now you are caught red handed again introducing another made up statement you said I made. Your lies never cease!
No one can have a straight forward debate with a lying POS like you no matter how hard we try.

This is NOT true. The steel has two chances to deform; when heating up and when cooling down. This is a known fact. Temperature differences as low as 300 degrees from one side to another on a steel beam can cause significant warping either during or after the fire as the steel cools.

Again You are answering your own made up argument asshole. You constantly make shit up that people did not say so you can explain it away and look smart, but you are a lying troll, again produce where I said this or implied it.

And remember, it is only your lameassed theory that says everything had to fail at once. According to the NIST theory, only column 79 had to collapse to initiate a global collapse.

And you don't even question the impossibility of this BS explanation, you are a fucking moron that believes the most outrageous BS NIST tell you, Wow so a CD company would have saved shitloads of overhead imploding this building?

So why do you insist on ignoring the penthouse collapsing? Whether or not the external facade deforms is immaterial as you can not prove it SHOULD have deformed. That would only be your opinion and we all know how worthless that is. So what you are asking to do is accept your OPINION as evidence when it should be treated like the bullshit it is.

I do not ignore the penthouse, how could anybody? The point is that it is too improbable to believe NIST, when they say all this collapsing was going on while not a hint on the outside to make anyone suspect it was going on.
Do you say that all these columns and beams and material gave was sooo fast as to cause the 2.25 secs. of free fall?

Then why do you insist on ignoring it and ONLY focusing on the deformation of the outside walls? What explanation do you have other than an internal collapse to explain why the penthouse disappeared into the building? YOU claim an internal collapse could not have been happening, yet you ignore the evidence of that very thing happening.

I believe the collapse was caused by something other then sporadic fires like many people do. I looked at it, read the NIST explanation, and take their track record of lying into account too. But most importantly I take into consideration how huge 7 was, how fortified it was, how it wasn't hit by a plane, how only sporadic fires of unknown origin were in it. What the 2 people inside of it said after they were rescued.
See those things make a reasonable person look at it from all angles, not just from the side that took years to explain it, all the while side stepping other known facts and witnesses, how their computer simulation is way the fuck off and they wont let anybody test their theory with it.

So name the facts they twisted to fit their theory?

There are many that I will gladly post, shortly, that credible people in positions that are relevant to the topic have produced.

Their theory explains the penthouse and the windows blowing out and the kink and the freefall acceleration for 2.25 seconds and how the collapse could have started from a single point of failure. THEIR theory fits ALL the facts. Your theory only fits your opinions and ASSumptions of what happened.

Their version fits the way they needed it to fit, or are you really that naive or such a staunch brown nosing brain washed ignorant fool?

Which point would that be? That I can admit my mistakes and am willing to alter my beliefs to fit the evidence but you'll go down in a flaming pile of shit before admitting a mistake? That point is blazingly clear.

Look You have been caught lying and twisting what people post and I even caught you making up more BS as I stated above, your credibility is shit. No one can have a decent debate with you because the first thing out of your mouth is a disparaging remark and name calling like some internet troll bully
You are the worst of the worst. Now I have challenged to to produce a post of mine that says or implies what you said above.

Sure I do. It is just that, unlike a piece of shit tratiorous dog like you, I demand evidence before I start accusing people.

Sure you do, asswipe, even when we post what experts and credible folks say in rebuttal to NIST you wave it away with a few insults, and highly unnecessary remarks and comments. You must have gotten the shit beat out of you as a kid, among other personal hangups that make you act this way.

You do it based on opinion and ASSumptions that are all based on lies and bullshit. So which is more responsible? Basing one's belief on the evidence or basing one's beliefs on ones assumptions that IGNORE the evidence?

You're an idiot to knowingly except the NIST version with the many defects and highly unlikely ASSumptions, that many credible trustworthy people have gone on record to prove as such, with facts. Now why do you think so many of these people have come forward and risk all the ridicule and slander, and worse, their very lives? Because they want to make money selling some books or videos? If you think that you are a very delusional person with serious mental hangups, but you already have proved this to be the case.

Yet there is only one truth. We can't both be right. Therefore one of us is dead wrong. Let's see.... I have all the evidence..... you have dick.

And just how do you know you have all the evidence? Do you have solid proof, any of the steel laying around you tested? No you have the ASSumptions of a government agency/authority that has every reason to lie to save their own asses, and jobs. You have a highly dubious theory that when put under scrutiny doesn't hold up, that is why they are too scared to let any real scientists, and physicists test their computer model.

I look at all the facts. You ignore everything that doesn't fit your theory. I rely on authorities trusted world wide to be right. You rely on people who rely on fucking idiots like you for their living or people as delusional as you are or worse. Gee. This isn't hard to figure out.

Again the reasons are in the above post, but I will add that your blind faith in the authorities is why you are so gullible. It is these authorities that have shit all over the nation and its citizens.

Wrong yet again you lying piece of shit! The NIST has NOTHING to do with being a mouth piece for the government. They don't set policy. They don't confirm or deny who was responsible for 9/11. All they do is report what happened to the best of their ability and using every resource they have.

So NIST was under no pressure to produce results beneficial to the government huh?
You are really thinking that we should believe you on this huh?
NIST is an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce you bumbling SOB. They don't have to set policy, you stupid government dupe cocksucker.

Hundreds of engineers from numerous agencies and societies worked on the NIST reports. The reports have been examined world wide because other governments set codes based on NIST recommendations and engineers use NIST recommendations to build safer buildings. It's not about politics but about safety with them. Yes, we realize you fucktards think anything and everything dealing with the government all has some evil borg like mentality, but the truth brands you all seriously deranged.

The NIST REPORT IS FLAWED, and they had motive to produce a favorable story for the people they work for, the US government. You can take all that shit and shove it up your ass, along with your phony patriot screen name and act.
Real Patriotic thinking Americans don't buy this load of shit once they take the time to research it.

The only way it can be wrong is if evidence is presented that the facts the NIST was working on were wrong or that there is an aspect they did not take into account. You have yet to produce one iota of evidence that is real and not some jackass's opinion.

I will be glad to post links of the many people and independant agencies that have evidence and facts that seriously puts a lot of doubt on the NIST theory. Remember NIST has only ASSumptions, guesses, and their super duper secret computer program, to fall on, so quit making their version out to be anything more then that.
But then you lick the ass of the government and anybody whose in it, so its no surprise you worship what ever they say

Can't. Nobody has presented evidence they are materially wrong in their assessment. I sure as hell haven't seen any real evidence out of you. I said the possibility exists, not that I know of a flaw in their theory. You should learn how to read better. You keep embarassing yourself by fucking up.

You have been presented evidence that suggest NIST is wrong, there are many people who have way more experience in thee field then you or I, or anybody on here for that matter.
To say a massive campaign with facts and evidence to back them up does not exist shows what a lying fuck you are yet again
Just because it doesn't agree with you dos not mean it is not true, or viable.
After all they are better people then a sorry ass internet troll like you.

You instead talk out both sides of your disgusting mouth, saying we don't know the truth, and NIST could be wrong but they are STILL right according to their questionable facts!!

You never cease to amaze at your capacity to lie, distort, and con volute, and be the most hypocritical troll in existence.

More meaningless bullshit from you. You're just pissed off because you've been beaten yet again. Maybe when you grow up you can play with the big dogs. In the mean time, you're still just kitty litter; smelly, foul, and used to shit on.

Look you have never beaten me or probably anybody at anything other then being a social misfit that gets his kicks from making a complete fool of himself. Anybody can see what a sorry person you must be in real life when analyzing your ridiculous BS on these forums.

 

[Mr. Jones]

The only way it can be wrong is if evidence is presented that the facts the NIST was working on were wrong or that there is an aspect they did not take into account. You have yet to produce one iota of evidence that is real and not some jackass's opinion.

Why has NIST ignored the evidence that others have presented, or answered any of their critics questions, or engaged in honest debate with their detractors? Why are anybody elses opinions that counter NIST jackasses?

Nobody has presented evidence they are materially wrong in their assessment. I sure as hell haven't seen any real evidence out of you. I said the possibility exists, not that I know of a flaw in their theory. You should learn how to read better. You keep embarassing yourself by fucking up.
Their facts are only "questioned" by you ignorant fuckers. You have yet to present evidence the facts are wrong or that there are facts that were not taken into account. When you actually produce evidence and not opinion, then we can talk. Until then you and all your truthtard buddies are just talking out your ass.

you are a liar. Just because NIST ignored their critics does not in any way diminish what they present as evidence. NIST =Not Interested In Searching For Truth

I'm posting these links for those that might be interested to know that there is opposition by credible people to the official explanation of the WTC 7 collapse, and the US governments version of 9-11 events, and the WTC twin towers collapses.

Parrot911 has gone out on a limb to say no one has produced any credible counter evidence, and that anybody who has is a "jackass" so here are links to read that once again show what a deceitful liar this USMB poster is.
One should take into careful consideration that the NIST report is only a theory based on THEIR assumptions, and came from a US government agency of the Commerce dept, and they are essentially employees of the US government, so do you think there is ANY chance they would produce a report that would put the US government including the president in a bad light, or claim anything other then fires caused the collapse of WTC 7?


Regardless of that we depended on NIST to fully explain to the best of its ability how a 47 story building that wasn't hit by any planes came down in a manner that many say resembled a controlled demolition.
What these critics have to say is noteworthy if you are a person looking at both sides of the issue.


NIST avoided that problem with the WTC 7 investigation by simply not performing any physical tests to support its theory. Instead of throwing a few beams and columns together and heating them to see what might happen, NIST built its final story on nothing but computer models that it said took excruciatingly long periods of time to process ("…a 25 s analysis took up to 8 weeks to complete.")
In other words, for NIST, avoiding problems means avoiding reality.
The NIST WTC 7 Report: Bush Science reaches its peak - 911truth.org

Freefall and Building 7 on 9/11

Evidence page

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ]YouTube - ‪WTC7 in Freefall--No Longer Controversial‬‏[/ame]

Fire Fighters For 9-11 Truth » Evidence

Jonathan H. Cole, P.E.
Re: Public Comments of NIST Reports NCSTAR 1A – “Final Report on
the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7”
RE: WTC7: Comments by Jonathan Cole

9/11: Looking for Truth in Credentials: The Peculiar WTC “Experts”

Thank you for visiting The Journal of 9/11 Studies, a peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal, covering the whole of research related to the events of 11 September, 2001. Many fields of study are represented in the journal, including Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Psychology. All content is freely available online. Our mission in the past has been to provide an outlet for evidence-based research into the events of 9/11 that might not otherwise have been published, due to the resistance that many established journals and other institutions have displayed toward this topic. It is now our belief that the case for falsity of the official explanation is so well established and demonstrated by papers in this Journal that there is little to be gained from accepting more papers here.
Journal of 9/11 Studies

9/11 TRUTH: Kevin Ryan Exposes Access for Demolition Crews to WTC Buildings « tobefree

This blog has debunked the talking point that the sound levels on 9/11 were not consistent with the use of explosives.
Debunking the Debunkers: WTC 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions

Last week, a group of scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, signed a petition condemning the White House for deliberately and systematically distorting scientific fact in the service of policy goals on the environment, health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry at home and abroad.
Leading Scientists Accuse Bush of Politicizing Science

http://911blogger.com/node/17704

According to people like Parrot911 these people
who accuse the government and or its agencies of distorting science are liars, 'truthtards" and a host of other names, simply because they have come out publicly to rebuke the governments version of 9-11 events.
Furthermore the group of scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, accused the Bush administration of
"undermining the independence of the science advisory panels. There are literally hundreds of these independent panels to federal agencies from the Department of Defense across to Health and Human Services, the Department of Energy, the EPA, the FDA, and other agencies. And these panels serve an important function in providing independent, objective scientific advice to these agencies on critical scientific and technical issues..."

If these highly credible and intelligent individuals are brave enough to make these assertions, shouldn't we as American Citizens investigate their claims, make up our own minds, and do our own thinking, instead of letting the government who has a track record of lying to us, do it for us?
Or letting people who are nothing more then internet trolls, like Parrot911 discourage us from honest debate and discussion, and from asking questions and researching things of importance by using every known fallacy to discredit and ridicule people skeptical of things like like 9-11 and other issues?

 

[P F Tinmore]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tXtl0PJG2M&feature=related]YouTube - ‪9/11 Omission Hearings - Michael Ruppert & Indira Singh Q&A - 9/9/2004‬‏[/ame]

 

[candycorn]

The only way it can be wrong is if evidence is presented that the facts the NIST was working on were wrong or that there is an aspect they did not take into account. You have yet to produce one iota of evidence that is real and not some jackass's opinion.

Why has NIST ignored the evidence that others have presented, or answered any of their critics questions, or engaged in honest debate with their detractors? Why are anybody elses opinions that counter NIST jackasses?

Nobody has presented evidence they are materially wrong in their assessment. I sure as hell haven't seen any real evidence out of you. I said the possibility exists, not that I know of a flaw in their theory. You should learn how to read better. You keep embarassing yourself by fucking up.
Their facts are only "questioned" by you ignorant fuckers. You have yet to present evidence the facts are wrong or that there are facts that were not taken into account. When you actually produce evidence and not opinion, then we can talk. Until then you and all your truthtard buddies are just talking out your ass.

you are a liar. Just because NIST ignored their critics does not in any way diminish what they present as evidence. NIST =Not Interested In Searching For Truth

I'm posting these links for those that might be interested to know that there is opposition by credible people to the official explanation of the WTC 7 collapse, and the US governments version of 9-11 events, and the WTC twin towers collapses.

Parrot911 has gone out on a limb to say no one has produced any credible counter evidence, and that anybody who has is a "jackass" so here are links to read that once again show what a deceitful liar this USMB poster is.
One should take into careful consideration that the NIST report is only a theory based on THEIR assumptions, and came from a US government agency of the Commerce dept, and they are essentially employees of the US government, so do you think there is ANY chance they would produce a report that would put the US government including the president in a bad light, or claim anything other then fires caused the collapse of WTC 7?


Regardless of that we depended on NIST to fully explain to the best of its ability how a 47 story building that wasn't hit by any planes came down in a manner that many say resembled a controlled demolition.
What these critics have to say is noteworthy if you are a person looking at both sides of the issue.


NIST avoided that problem with the WTC 7 investigation by simply not performing any physical tests to support its theory. Instead of throwing a few beams and columns together and heating them to see what might happen, NIST built its final story on nothing but computer models that it said took excruciatingly long periods of time to process ("…a 25 s analysis took up to 8 weeks to complete.")
In other words, for NIST, avoiding problems means avoiding reality.
The NIST WTC 7 Report: Bush Science reaches its peak - 911truth.org

Freefall and Building 7 on 9/11

Evidence page

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rP9Qp5QWRMQ]YouTube - ‪WTC7 in Freefall--No Longer Controversial‬‏[/ame]

Fire Fighters For 9-11 Truth » Evidence

Jonathan H. Cole, P.E.
Re: Public Comments of NIST Reports NCSTAR 1A – “Final Report on
the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7”
RE: WTC7: Comments by Jonathan Cole

9/11: Looking for Truth in Credentials: The Peculiar WTC “Experts”

Thank you for visiting The Journal of 9/11 Studies, a peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal, covering the whole of research related to the events of 11 September, 2001. Many fields of study are represented in the journal, including Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Psychology. All content is freely available online. Our mission in the past has been to provide an outlet for evidence-based research into the events of 9/11 that might not otherwise have been published, due to the resistance that many established journals and other institutions have displayed toward this topic. It is now our belief that the case for falsity of the official explanation is so well established and demonstrated by papers in this Journal that there is little to be gained from accepting more papers here.
Journal of 9/11 Studies

9/11 TRUTH: Kevin Ryan Exposes Access for Demolition Crews to WTC Buildings « tobefree

This blog has debunked the talking point that the sound levels on 9/11 were not consistent with the use of explosives.
Debunking the Debunkers: WTC 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions

Last week, a group of scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, signed a petition condemning the White House for deliberately and systematically distorting scientific fact in the service of policy goals on the environment, health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry at home and abroad.
Leading Scientists Accuse Bush of Politicizing Science

Kevin Ryan: The NIST WTC 7 Report: Bush Science reaches its peak | 911Blogger.com

According to people like Parrot911 these people
who accuse the government and or its agencies of distorting science are liars, 'truthtards" and a host of other names, simply because they have come out publicly to rebuke the governments version of 9-11 events.
Furthermore the group of scientists, including 20 Nobel laureates, accused the Bush administration of
"undermining the independence of the science advisory panels. There are literally hundreds of these independent panels to federal agencies from the Department of Defense across to Health and Human Services, the Department of Energy, the EPA, the FDA, and other agencies. And these panels serve an important function in providing independent, objective scientific advice to these agencies on critical scientific and technical issues..."

If these highly credible and intelligent individuals are brave enough to make these assertions, shouldn't we as American Citizens investigate their claims, make up our own minds, and do our own thinking, instead of letting the government who has a track record of lying to us, do it for us?
Or letting people who are nothing more then internet trolls, like Parrot911 discourage us from honest debate and discussion, and from asking questions and researching things of importance by using every known fallacy to discredit and ridicule people skeptical of things like like 9-11 and other issues?

No, you get ridiculed because you are ridiculous. See above...you're talking about something totally unrelated to 9/11 when you employ the Nobel Laureates. So you've lost credibility and deserve the ridicule you receive.

Nobody is denying that the Bush Administration was anti-science in a great many fields.

The record shows that he was.

The record also shows no thermite at grond zero, no signs of a missile hitting the Pentagon, nothing but Flight 93 hitting the field in Pennsylvania, no involvement in the operation other than those who have been formally accused, and that you have shit for brains.