911 WTC 7 Silent Thermate Demolition, Debunkers Grab Your Ankles!

[n0spam4me]

o, not "innuendo" ..... look at what happened, the result that was observed required that all the structural bits be cut, or fail because of fire and do so on a schedule.

Then show us the thousands up thousands of cut girders. They would be *everywhere* if your theory were valid. That's 50,000 cuts in the WTC 1 and 2 alone. Remember, roughly 250 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor. With roughly 90 floors in one tower and 80 floors in the other from the impact site to the ground.

That's 50,490 cuts in girders....which we'll round down to 50,000 for the sake of brevity.

That's more cuts than there are girders in the building. Every single girder should not only be cut, but cut multiple times. There should be thousand up thousands of such cuts. And yet when challenged to SHOW US, not allude to them or insinuate them.......we get excuses.

You can't show us....because the cuts your theory requires simply don't exist. Killing your conspiracy yet again.

In your interpretation of how the controlled demolition may have happened, however, there are other possibilities.
The details, that is down in the nits of the event are very much still in question but the big picture simply screams controlled demolition, One of the problems with the official version, is the fact that in the case of some mass from above "collapsing" down and by staying on top of the tower, somehow beat down the entire structure when in fact any mass of rubble, descending upon the as yet undamaged part of the tower, would by the very nature of the event meet resistance and because the stuff would experience virtually no resistance by simply falling over the side of the tower and descending through air down to street level, why should anybody believe in the special magic that kept the descending mass centered on the tower core? Also, with the mass quantities of pulverized material forcibly ejected from the tower(s) how is it to be known if the "pile driver" increased in mass or for that matter decreased in mass on the way down?

 

[n0spam4me]

o, not "innuendo" ..... look at what happened, the result that was observed required that all the structural bits be cut, or fail because of fire and do so on a schedule.

Then show us the thousands up thousands of cut girders. They would be *everywhere* if your theory were valid. That's 50,000 cuts in the WTC 1 and 2 alone. Remember, roughly 250 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor. With roughly 90 floors in one tower and 80 floors in the other from the impact site to the ground.

That's 50,490 cuts in girders....which we'll round down to 50,000 for the sake of brevity.

That's more cuts than there are girders in the building. Every single girder should not only be cut, but cut multiple times. There should be thousand up thousands of such cuts. And yet when challenged to SHOW US, not allude to them or insinuate them.......we get excuses.

You can't show us....because the cuts your theory requires simply don't exist. Killing your conspiracy yet again.

You seem to be hung-up on seeing evidence that isn't documented because the documentary pix were not done.
Problem with the bit you claim to be the only way that it could have been done, really isn't, don't try to second guess the controlled demolition. Note that the event speaks for itself in that the towers were destroyed and the whole event went off like clock work, with the towers disintegrating as if hit by the energy beam from a KLINGON war-bird .... Not that I'm somekinda disciple of Dr. Judy ..... lets keep an open mind here. The fact is that the energy to destroy both towers had to have been focused, because without focus, the towers would not have been completely destroyed.

 

[Skylar]

In your interpretation of how the controlled demolition may have happened, however, there are other possibilities.

So it was controlled demolition....without the actual demolition? Do you understand how monumentally stupid that sounds to anyone not as emotionally invested in your failed conspiracy as you are?

What do you think controlled demolition uses to bring down buildings.....harsh language? The charges CUT the girders. They SEVER the girders. For WTC 1 and 2, the collapse came down opposite of controlled demolition, beginning at the point of impact of the planes and proceeding downward all the way to the ground.

For your 'controlled demolition' theory to work, each floor would have to be destroyed individually. Both the outer panels and the core columns shared the load energy of the building. Both would have had to been cut in controlled demolition. Which means tens of thousands of cuts.

There were none.

We have twisted girders. We have bent girders. We have warped girders. But the thousands and thousands and thousands of cuts that your theory requires........don't exist. It seems so obvious as it goes without saying, but clearly I need to clue you in:

There's no such thing as demolition without demolition.

And yet it never occured to you to ask these questions, did it? You've been apeing this nonsense for *how* many years, and it never occured to you to even think about this, did it? There were no bombs ever found. There were no girders cut in a manner consistent with controlled demolition. The entire WTC plaza was checked a week before the collapse by the port authority bomb squad....and neither they nor their bomb sniffing dogs found anything. The buildings were ON FIRE, which means that the bombs would have burned up. There was no apparatus of explosives ever found. There was no residue of explosives found in dust samples taken from the WTC plaza.

Sorry, chum......but your bomb theory is shit. Its nonsensically complicated, void of actual evidence, and contradicted by overwhelming evidence. And yet you're still giving yourself blisters furiously polishing this little turd of a conspiracy. Its just an awful, awful explanation of the events of 911.

 

[n0spam4me]

"conspiracy" aside, the physics of the event prove beyond any doubt that the towers & 7 had to have had help to "collapse" in the manner that was observed.

There are things that are I believe intentional voids in the data available, why are there no documentary pix
of ground zero right after the "collapse" event(s)? Where is the documentation of how much of any one of the 4 alleged airliners used in the attack had been recovered and examined? We are told by "newsgeeks" that all is as it should be, trust us, fear not good people, your Government is looking out for your best interests. Right, & I'm the Easter Bunny!

 

[Skylar]

"conspiracy" aside, the physics of the event prove beyond any doubt that the towers & 7 had to have had help to "collapse" in the manner that was observed.

I'm not going to summarily ignore the monumental failures of your conspiracy just because they're inconvenient to your argument. Bombs are a physical impossibility. Charges cut girders. Your theory requires tens of thousands of cut girders.

The girders weren't cut.

Ending your silly conspiracy yet again. There's no such thing as 'silent explosives'. And there's no such thing as controlled demolition without demolition. Your theory doesn't work. And even you can't make sense of it.

 

[n0spam4me]

"conspiracy" aside, the physics of the event prove beyond any doubt that the towers & 7 had to have had help to "collapse" in the manner that was observed.

I'm not going to summarily ignore the monumental failures of your conspiracy just because they're inconvenient to your argument. Bombs are a physical impossibility. Charges cut girders. Your theory requires tens of thousands of cut girders.

The girders weren't cut.

Ending your silly conspiracy yet again. There's no such thing as 'silent explosives'. And there's no such thing as controlled demolition without demolition. Your theory doesn't work. And even you can't make sense of it.

obviously you haven't really looked at the "collapse" of the towers & 7, You consistently deny the sounds heard and indeed the sounds recorded on the video soundtrack, the "silent" demolition of WTC7 didn't happen.
have you bought into the NIST lame excuse that controlled demolition was impossible because it would involve explosives that make a loud noise and of course nobody heard anything at all as the buildings "collapsed" .....

 

[daws101]

What I do have for you is the LOGIC that clearly indicates the destruction of WTC7 was an engineered event.

Logic has nothing to do with your process. Otherwise, you wouldn't ignore the theory crippling holes in your beliefs. For example, the WTC 7 collapse initiated in silence. Controlled demolition is ludicrously loud. And there are no such thing as silent explosives.

That just kills your 'bomb' theory. You can't resolve it. You can't explain it. You simply ignore it. That's both illogical and irrational.

You also ignore the fact that there wasn't a single cut found on any girder (you know, the 'demolition' in controlled demolition'), the building was on fire (negating any system of controlled demolition, as it would have also been on fire), or the fact that the FDNY anticipated the collapse of the WTC 7 by hours due to fire and structural damage. They measured its bulging, its buckling, its leaning......for hours.

You ignore it all. No rational person ever would.

Funny thing that, when I point to obviously cut steel, people tell me that but bit in question was cut during the clean-up process and so my claim must be totally invalid.

Funny thing is, you're not actually pointing to anything. You're alluding. You're insinuating. Remember, almost every girder would have to be cut per your silly conspiracy. With 50,000 cuts in the WTC 1 and 2 alone. With more than 80% of them on the outside of the building. And yet......all you have is innuendo.

......And of course, there's no such thing as silent explosives. Killing your conspiracy again. Here's the collapse of WTC 7:



Um, what explosions? The collapse initiated so quietly it didn't even interrupt the conversation of those nearby. Where actual controlled demolition is ridiculously loud:



No explosions, no explosives. Your theory doesn't work. But lets beat a dead horse, shall we?

.......There's also no residue of explosives found in dust samples. Killing your conspiracy yet again.

.......And the Port Authority bomb squad went through the WTC plaza only a week before the attack. And no bomb was ever found. And poof, your conspiracy dies yet again.

.......And not a single charge or any apparatus of explosive was ever found, before during or after the collapse. Not an inch of blasting wire. Not a single receiver, control board, or a single piece of det cord. Despite your conspiracy requiring tens of thousands of such charges, dozens of miles of wiring, and elaborate system of timers or signal receivers.

Yet...nothing. Absolutely nothing.

......And the buildings were on fire, with the largest fires being the location of the initiation of each collapse. Meaning any system of 'explosives' would have been on fire. Nixing your silly theory yet again.

But keep ignoring. Willful ignorance is really the only refuge for the truther. As their theory is insanely complicated, fact free, and just a stupidly awful explanation.

"conspiracy" aside, the physics of the event prove beyond any doubt that the towers & 7 had to have had help to "collapse" in the manner that was observed.

I'm not going to summarily ignore the monumental failures of your conspiracy just because they're inconvenient to your argument. Bombs are a physical impossibility. Charges cut girders. Your theory requires tens of thousands of cut girders.

The girders weren't cut.

Ending your silly conspiracy yet again. There's no such thing as 'silent explosives'. And there's no such thing as controlled demolition without demolition. Your theory doesn't work. And even you can't make sense of it.

obviously you haven't really looked at the "collapse" of the towers & 7, You consistently deny the sounds heard and indeed the sounds recorded on the video soundtrack, the "silent" demolition of WTC7 didn't happen.
have you bought into the NIST lame excuse that controlled demolition was impossible because it would involve explosives that make a loud noise and of course nobody heard anything at all as the buildings "collapsed" .....

the classic twoofer rationalization.
sorry spammy but no one has said nobody heard anything but as I explained before most people ,you included can't tell the difference between a blowout and a back fire..

 

[daws101]

 

[Faun]

o, not "innuendo" ..... look at what happened, the result that was observed required that all the structural bits be cut, or fail because of fire and do so on a schedule.

Then show us the thousands up thousands of cut girders. They would be *everywhere* if your theory were valid. That's 50,000 cuts in the WTC 1 and 2 alone. Remember, roughly 250 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor. With roughly 90 floors in one tower and 80 floors in the other from the impact site to the ground.

That's 50,490 cuts in girders....which we'll round down to 50,000 for the sake of brevity.

That's more cuts than there are girders in the building. Every single girder should not only be cut, but cut multiple times. There should be thousand up thousands of such cuts. And yet when challenged to SHOW US, not allude to them or insinuate them.......we get excuses.

You can't show us....because the cuts your theory requires simply don't exist. Killing your conspiracy yet again.

You seem to be hung-up on seeing evidence that isn't documented because the documentary pix were not done.
Problem with the bit you claim to be the only way that it could have been done, really isn't, don't try to second guess the controlled demolition. Note that the event speaks for itself in that the towers were destroyed and the whole event went off like clock work, with the towers disintegrating as if hit by the energy beam from a KLINGON war-bird .... Not that I'm somekinda disciple of Dr. Judy ..... lets keep an open mind here. The fact is that the energy to destroy both towers had to have been focused, because without focus, the towers would not have been completely destroyed.

But it didn't go off like clockwork. Building 7 came down 7 hours later. If it were a controlled demolition, why not bring it down with the Twin Towers?

 

[daws101]

o, not "innuendo" ..... look at what happened, the result that was observed required that all the structural bits be cut, or fail because of fire and do so on a schedule.

Then show us the thousands up thousands of cut girders. They would be *everywhere* if your theory were valid. That's 50,000 cuts in the WTC 1 and 2 alone. Remember, roughly 250 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor. With roughly 90 floors in one tower and 80 floors in the other from the impact site to the ground.

That's 50,490 cuts in girders....which we'll round down to 50,000 for the sake of brevity.

That's more cuts than there are girders in the building. Every single girder should not only be cut, but cut multiple times. There should be thousand up thousands of such cuts. And yet when challenged to SHOW US, not allude to them or insinuate them.......we get excuses.

You can't show us....because the cuts your theory requires simply don't exist. Killing your conspiracy yet again.

You seem to be hung-up on seeing evidence that isn't documented because the documentary pix were not done.
Problem with the bit you claim to be the only way that it could have been done, really isn't, don't try to second guess the controlled demolition. Note that the event speaks for itself in that the towers were destroyed and the whole event went off like clock work, with the towers disintegrating as if hit by the energy beam from a KLINGON war-bird .... Not that I'm somekinda disciple of Dr. Judy ..... lets keep an open mind here. The fact is that the energy to destroy both towers had to have been focused, because without focus, the towers would not have been completely destroyed.

But it didn't go off like clockwork. Building 7 came down 7 hours later. If it were a controlled demolition, why not bring it down with the Twin Towers?

spammy has a huge problem with reality

 

[SFC Ollie]

Wow, you guys have some real winners that moved in here. Or is it socks from Shitforbrains?

Enjoy my friends....​

 

[n0spam4me]

o, not "innuendo" ..... look at what happened, the result that was observed required that all the structural bits be cut, or fail because of fire and do so on a schedule.

Then show us the thousands up thousands of cut girders. They would be *everywhere* if your theory were valid. That's 50,000 cuts in the WTC 1 and 2 alone. Remember, roughly 250 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor. With roughly 90 floors in one tower and 80 floors in the other from the impact site to the ground.

That's 50,490 cuts in girders....which we'll round down to 50,000 for the sake of brevity.

That's more cuts than there are girders in the building. Every single girder should not only be cut, but cut multiple times. There should be thousand up thousands of such cuts. And yet when challenged to SHOW US, not allude to them or insinuate them.......we get excuses.

You can't show us....because the cuts your theory requires simply don't exist. Killing your conspiracy yet again.

You seem to be hung-up on seeing evidence that isn't documented because the documentary pix were not done.
Problem with the bit you claim to be the only way that it could have been done, really isn't, don't try to second guess the controlled demolition. Note that the event speaks for itself in that the towers were destroyed and the whole event went off like clock work, with the towers disintegrating as if hit by the energy beam from a KLINGON war-bird .... Not that I'm somekinda disciple of Dr. Judy ..... lets keep an open mind here. The fact is that the energy to destroy both towers had to have been focused, because without focus, the towers would not have been completely destroyed.

But it didn't go off like clockwork. Building 7 came down 7 hours later. If it were a controlled demolition, why not bring it down with the Twin Towers?

Invitation to speculation ..... no thankx!
The facts of the "collapse" of not only 7 but the towers also, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that all three buidligs were destroyed by controlled demolition.

 

[SAYIT]

o, not "innuendo" ..... look at what happened, the result that was observed required that all the structural bits be cut, or fail because of fire and do so on a schedule.

Then show us the thousands up thousands of cut girders. They would be *everywhere* if your theory were valid. That's 50,000 cuts in the WTC 1 and 2 alone. Remember, roughly 250 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor. With roughly 90 floors in one tower and 80 floors in the other from the impact site to the ground.

That's 50,490 cuts in girders....which we'll round down to 50,000 for the sake of brevity.

That's more cuts than there are girders in the building. Every single girder should not only be cut, but cut multiple times. There should be thousand up thousands of such cuts. And yet when challenged to SHOW US, not allude to them or insinuate them.......we get excuses.

You can't show us....because the cuts your theory requires simply don't exist. Killing your conspiracy yet again.

You seem to be hung-up on seeing evidence that isn't documented because the documentary pix were not done.
Problem with the bit you claim to be the only way that it could have been done, really isn't, don't try to second guess the controlled demolition. Note that the event speaks for itself in that the towers were destroyed and the whole event went off like clock work, with the towers disintegrating as if hit by the energy beam from a KLINGON war-bird .... Not that I'm somekinda disciple of Dr. Judy ..... lets keep an open mind here. The fact is that the energy to destroy both towers had to have been focused, because without focus, the towers would not have been completely destroyed.

But it didn't go off like clockwork. Building 7 came down 7 hours later. If it were a controlled demolition, why not bring it down with the Twin Towers?

Invitation to speculation ..... no thankx!
The facts of the "collapse" of not only 7 but the towers also, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that all three buidligs were destroyed by controlled demolition.

Yet fully 13 years later you have no evidence of a controlled demo, none of a magical energy source which could have survived hours of "chaotic" fires and none of those who perpetrated your version of 9/11. None.
Instead you insist "no planes were hijacked on 9/11" and that the fires were somehow "staged" but can't seem to prove any of that or even make it sound like anything but the ravings of a very strange and lonely boy.

 

[Faun]

o, not "innuendo" ..... look at what happened, the result that was observed required that all the structural bits be cut, or fail because of fire and do so on a schedule.

Then show us the thousands up thousands of cut girders. They would be *everywhere* if your theory were valid. That's 50,000 cuts in the WTC 1 and 2 alone. Remember, roughly 250 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor. With roughly 90 floors in one tower and 80 floors in the other from the impact site to the ground.

That's 50,490 cuts in girders....which we'll round down to 50,000 for the sake of brevity.

That's more cuts than there are girders in the building. Every single girder should not only be cut, but cut multiple times. There should be thousand up thousands of such cuts. And yet when challenged to SHOW US, not allude to them or insinuate them.......we get excuses.

You can't show us....because the cuts your theory requires simply don't exist. Killing your conspiracy yet again.

You seem to be hung-up on seeing evidence that isn't documented because the documentary pix were not done.
Problem with the bit you claim to be the only way that it could have been done, really isn't, don't try to second guess the controlled demolition. Note that the event speaks for itself in that the towers were destroyed and the whole event went off like clock work, with the towers disintegrating as if hit by the energy beam from a KLINGON war-bird .... Not that I'm somekinda disciple of Dr. Judy ..... lets keep an open mind here. The fact is that the energy to destroy both towers had to have been focused, because without focus, the towers would not have been completely destroyed.

But it didn't go off like clockwork. Building 7 came down 7 hours later. If it were a controlled demolition, why not bring it down with the Twin Towers?

Invitation to speculation ..... no thankx!
The facts of the "collapse" of not only 7 but the towers also, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that all three buidligs were destroyed by controlled demolition.

How ironic then since your entire premise is based on the speculation that no planes were used, despite the void of evidence supporting your lunacy; and your speculation that controlled demolitions brought down the WTC, also despite the void of evidence.

 

[n0spam4me]

"controlled demolitions brought down the WTC, also despite the void of evidence."

The above is opinion ONLY, the evidence is present in abundance if you are willing to look, example: the towers & 7 experienced acceleration as they "collapsed" and all three were totally destroyed.

Note that buildings 3, 4, 5, & 6 were damaged but not totally destroyed ..... Why only WTC 1, 2 & 7?

 

[Montrovant]

"controlled demolitions brought down the WTC, also despite the void of evidence."

The above is opinion ONLY, the evidence is present in abundance if you are willing to look, example: the towers & 7 experienced acceleration as they "collapsed" and all three were totally destroyed.

Note that buildings 3, 4, 5, & 6 were damaged but not totally destroyed ..... Why only WTC 1, 2 & 7?

Collapsing buildings experienced acceleration?

Some buildings were damaged and didn't collapse?

You're right, smoking gun evidence right there!

 

[n0spam4me]

Collapsing buildings experienced acceleration?

Some buildings were damaged and didn't collapse?

You're right, smoking gun evidence right there!

Look at the "collapse"event(s) for the towers, the wave of destruction moves downward at aprox 64% of the acceleration of gravity, and this can be observed & measured. Do you have a problem with scientific analysis of the "collapse" events?

 

[Montrovant]

Collapsing buildings experienced acceleration?

Some buildings were damaged and didn't collapse?

You're right, smoking gun evidence right there!

Look at the "collapse"event(s) for the towers, the wave of destruction moves downward at aprox 64% of the acceleration of gravity, and this can be observed & measured. Do you have a problem with scientific analysis of the "collapse" events?

Nope, no problem with scientific analysis. However, your ridiculous attempt at showing evidence is just that, ridiculous. Of course the buildings experienced acceleration, that's a requirement in a collapse. Of course some buildings were damaged and didn't collapse; plenty of buildings have been damaged without collapsing. Neither of your statements indicate anything about demolition or intentional collapse.

Maybe you are using extremely poor wording in your brief summary, but it's still very funny.

 

[n0spam4me]

Of course the buildings experienced acceleration, that's a requirement in a collapse.

Wow man, can you support that statement with scientific evidence? That is a rather tall order .... no?

 

[CAPTCHATHIS]

The NIST investigation was contracted out to companies that have made out handsomely since, if not before the investigation.

Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC) was awarded an administrative services contract to "support" the two-year investigation.
WTC Investigation Contracts

In 2003 SAIC was the #3 government contractor.
2003 Top 100 -- Washington Technology

With a reported $11.17 billion in revenue at the time, it split in Sept 2013 to form the companies SAIC and Leidos Holdings, Inc

SAIC played a large part in the NSA's Trailblazer Project an early take on it's now more widely know phone, email communications surveillance and storage program.

Some of those passing through its Board Room:

Admiral Bobby Inman, former head NSA, Naval Intelligence, Vice Director of DIA and deputy director of the CIA
Robert Gates, former CIA director, Secretary of Defense, Iran-Contra
William B. Black, Jr. went from NSA (1959-1997) to SAIC VP (1997-2000) back to Deputy Director of NSA (2000-2006)
William Perry, former Secretary of Defense, chairman Global Technology Partners, LLC "a defense/aerospace-focused investment banking boutique"
John Deutch, former CIA director, Deputy Secretary of Defense, director of Raytheon
Melvin Laird, Defense Secretary under President Nixon
J.B. Wiesler Vice Chairman, Bank of America
Donald Foley, a top exec at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the military agency that invented the Internet, is a current SAIC director.
Retired General Max Thurman, commander of the Panama invasion,
Donald Hicks, Chairman of Hicks & Associates, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary SAIC, former Under Secretary of Defense for Research & Engineering, Senior VP, Marketing & Technology, for Northrop Grumman, head of Applied Physics Section of Boeing Aerospace
Donald Kerr, former head of the Los Alamos National Laboratory.
Jerome Hauer, NY Office of Emergency Management, managing director with Kroll Associates (WTC security), national security advisor with the Department of Health and Human Services
John P. Jumper Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force from September 6, 2001 to September 2, 2005