Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Comments?Dude, seriously...you are absolutely clueless......stop trying to "piggyback" off of your "me too" pal....it makes you look desperate....sheeesh.So symmetry is a characteristic of controlled demolition? Do I have to link videos of demolitions that show non-symmetrical collapses? What exactly is your point here?
So you admit that your claim of "falling into their own footprint" is incorrect? Because "falling into their own footprint" would mean that all the debris would have fallen into a 208' x 208' square (the footprint of the towers)? And since you admit "falling debris hit other buildings", that means they DIDN'T fall into their own footprint. Isn't one of the characteristics of a controlled demolition that debris is contained? Your argument is falling apart Dale.
Nobody said they were "fragile". Quite putting words into my mouth.
That's what happens when debris falls into that area. Do you see perimeter columns from the towers in the center?
Where's the link to evidence of this claim? I'm sorry Dale, but your word means nothing to me. You need to start posting link and evidence to your claim. That's how debate works here.
Right. Caused by impacting debris.
My damage radius PROVES your claim of "falling into their own footprint" was bogus. Sorry Dale.
Dale, I don't use Popular Mechanics nor have I ever referenced it. Stop with the false accusations/insinuations.
You have yet to provide any link or source that says there are missile batteries around the Pentagon. So no, I don't believe it.
Why do you think that? What cameras were pointed to that specific location when the plane stuck? What makes you think that there should be pieces laying around like you think? What evidence are you using to come to that conclusion? Are you looking at similar impacts that show large pieces of plane laying around?
And all your claims are based on assumptions. How many links have you provided that show what you claim is correct? You claimed the hole in the Pentagon was too small yet I provided information to you that shows you to be incorrect. You didn;t even respond to it. Like I said. You're not open minded at all. All you do is provide your "evidence" and when further evidence is provided to refute your claims, you run to other topics and continue to claim everything is bullcrap. How is that open minded Dale? You never stick to one topic.
Another major hole in the 'controlled demolition' theory.....is that the collapse of the towers looks nothing like it. Actual controlled demolition starts at the bottom, with the main supports of the building destroyed with cutter charges and kicker charges firing up the height of the building to break it up. So all of the building falls at the exact same time.
The towers fell in exactly OPPOSITE that manner.
The collapse initiated at the point of impact with the planes. And then proceeded downward, one floor at a time, all the way to the ground. That means that each floor was destroyed individually. Increasing the number of explosives necessary in 'controlled demolition' by orders of magnitude. Which leads into the second major hole in the demolition theory:
The lack of cut girders. Explosive demolition uses cutter charges to literally slice through structural supports. With the building coming down top to bottom and every floor destroyed individually.....that's 249 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor...... 91 floors to the ground in one tower and 79 to the ground in the other, means more than 50,000 individual charges and cuts in the structure of the building.
Yet none of the girders were cut. We see bent girders. We see twisted girders. We see bowed girders. We don't see any cuts.
When the 'explosive demolition' theory mandates more than 50,000.
And no need to soften your language, Gam. The bomb theory is straight up, 100% natural, pure organic bullshit.
Notice how you don't actually address any of the truck sized holes in the 'explosive demolition' theory.
1) How the towers came down exactly opposite of explosive demolition.
2) The absurdity of planting and hiding 50,000 cutter charges and their apparatus in an occupied building.
3) And the complete and utter lack of any cut girders, despite the explosive demolition theory requiring tens of thousands of them.
But pretending that these theory killing holes doesn't exist doesn't magically make them disappear. You can close your eyes, but you can't make *us* unsee just how awful your explanation is.
It would not take 50,000 cutter charges to bring either one of the two twin towers. If you watch the videos of that event, you can see the "squibs" that are going off ten floors below the free fall.
You clearly have no idea how actual controlled demolition works. First off, its bottom to top. With the structural supports being taken out at the bottom and kicker charges breaking up the building so it all falls together.
That's not how the towers fell *at all*. The towers fell top to bottom. With each floor destroyed, one at a time. Exactly opposite of controlled demolition. The supports on each floor would have to be destroyed. All 47 core columns and 249 outer panels.
Second, when an ACTUAL squib goes off, that section of the building falls like a train dropped from the sky. But your version of a 'squib' fires. And then....nothing. Nothing falls at the point of the explosion. Its not until the debris field reaches the location of the 'squib' that the location actually collapses.
Um, Dale....that's nothing like controlled demolition.
And of course, there are no cut girders. Controlled demolition cuts girders. The explosive demolition theory requiring 10s of thousands. And you have none.
That's layers and layers of obvious contradiction to your theory. And you close your eyes to all of it, pretending none of it exists. Why? Because 'nothing can convince you'. Says who? Says you.
But why would a rational person ignore what you do?
Comments?Dude, seriously...you are absolutely clueless......stop trying to "piggyback" off of your "me too" pal....it makes you look desperate....sheeesh.Another major hole in the 'controlled demolition' theory.....is that the collapse of the towers looks nothing like it. Actual controlled demolition starts at the bottom, with the main supports of the building destroyed with cutter charges and kicker charges firing up the height of the building to break it up. So all of the building falls at the exact same time.
The towers fell in exactly OPPOSITE that manner.
The collapse initiated at the point of impact with the planes. And then proceeded downward, one floor at a time, all the way to the ground. That means that each floor was destroyed individually. Increasing the number of explosives necessary in 'controlled demolition' by orders of magnitude. Which leads into the second major hole in the demolition theory:
The lack of cut girders. Explosive demolition uses cutter charges to literally slice through structural supports. With the building coming down top to bottom and every floor destroyed individually.....that's 249 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor...... 91 floors to the ground in one tower and 79 to the ground in the other, means more than 50,000 individual charges and cuts in the structure of the building.
Yet none of the girders were cut. We see bent girders. We see twisted girders. We see bowed girders. We don't see any cuts.
When the 'explosive demolition' theory mandates more than 50,000.
And no need to soften your language, Gam. The bomb theory is straight up, 100% natural, pure organic bullshit.
Notice how you don't actually address any of the truck sized holes in the 'explosive demolition' theory.
1) How the towers came down exactly opposite of explosive demolition.
2) The absurdity of planting and hiding 50,000 cutter charges and their apparatus in an occupied building.
3) And the complete and utter lack of any cut girders, despite the explosive demolition theory requiring tens of thousands of them.
But pretending that these theory killing holes doesn't exist doesn't magically make them disappear. You can close your eyes, but you can't make *us* unsee just how awful your explanation is.
It would not take 50,000 cutter charges to bring either one of the two twin towers. If you watch the videos of that event, you can see the "squibs" that are going off ten floors below the free fall.
You clearly have no idea how actual controlled demolition works. First off, its bottom to top. With the structural supports being taken out at the bottom and kicker charges breaking up the building so it all falls together.
That's not how the towers fell *at all*. The towers fell top to bottom. With each floor destroyed, one at a time. Exactly opposite of controlled demolition. The supports on each floor would have to be destroyed. All 47 core columns and 249 outer panels.
Second, when an ACTUAL squib goes off, that section of the building falls like a train dropped from the sky. But your version of a 'squib' fires. And then....nothing. Nothing falls at the point of the explosion. Its not until the debris field reaches the location of the 'squib' that the location actually collapses.
Um, Dale....that's nothing like controlled demolition.
And of course, there are no cut girders. Controlled demolition cuts girders. The explosive demolition theory requiring 10s of thousands. And you have none.
That's layers and layers of obvious contradiction to your theory. And you close your eyes to all of it, pretending none of it exists. Why? Because 'nothing can convince you'. Says who? Says you.
But why would a rational person ignore what you do?
Numerous witnesses including firefighters attested to the fact that they heard a series of explosions in sequence...why don't you hunt them down and tell them that they didn't witness or hear what they did because after all, you know better....m'kay?
Comments?Dude, seriously...you are absolutely clueless......stop trying to "piggyback" off of your "me too" pal....it makes you look desperate....sheeesh.Another major hole in the 'controlled demolition' theory.....is that the collapse of the towers looks nothing like it. Actual controlled demolition starts at the bottom, with the main supports of the building destroyed with cutter charges and kicker charges firing up the height of the building to break it up. So all of the building falls at the exact same time.
The towers fell in exactly OPPOSITE that manner.
The collapse initiated at the point of impact with the planes. And then proceeded downward, one floor at a time, all the way to the ground. That means that each floor was destroyed individually. Increasing the number of explosives necessary in 'controlled demolition' by orders of magnitude. Which leads into the second major hole in the demolition theory:
The lack of cut girders. Explosive demolition uses cutter charges to literally slice through structural supports. With the building coming down top to bottom and every floor destroyed individually.....that's 249 outer panels and 47 core columns per floor...... 91 floors to the ground in one tower and 79 to the ground in the other, means more than 50,000 individual charges and cuts in the structure of the building.
Yet none of the girders were cut. We see bent girders. We see twisted girders. We see bowed girders. We don't see any cuts.
When the 'explosive demolition' theory mandates more than 50,000.
And no need to soften your language, Gam. The bomb theory is straight up, 100% natural, pure organic bullshit.
Notice how you don't actually address any of the truck sized holes in the 'explosive demolition' theory.
1) How the towers came down exactly opposite of explosive demolition.
2) The absurdity of planting and hiding 50,000 cutter charges and their apparatus in an occupied building.
3) And the complete and utter lack of any cut girders, despite the explosive demolition theory requiring tens of thousands of them.
But pretending that these theory killing holes doesn't exist doesn't magically make them disappear. You can close your eyes, but you can't make *us* unsee just how awful your explanation is.
It would not take 50,000 cutter charges to bring either one of the two twin towers. If you watch the videos of that event, you can see the "squibs" that are going off ten floors below the free fall.
You clearly have no idea how actual controlled demolition works. First off, its bottom to top. With the structural supports being taken out at the bottom and kicker charges breaking up the building so it all falls together.
That's not how the towers fell *at all*. The towers fell top to bottom. With each floor destroyed, one at a time. Exactly opposite of controlled demolition. The supports on each floor would have to be destroyed. All 47 core columns and 249 outer panels.
Second, when an ACTUAL squib goes off, that section of the building falls like a train dropped from the sky. But your version of a 'squib' fires. And then....nothing. Nothing falls at the point of the explosion. Its not until the debris field reaches the location of the 'squib' that the location actually collapses.
Um, Dale....that's nothing like controlled demolition.
And of course, there are no cut girders. Controlled demolition cuts girders. The explosive demolition theory requiring 10s of thousands. And you have none.
That's layers and layers of obvious contradiction to your theory. And you close your eyes to all of it, pretending none of it exists. Why? Because 'nothing can convince you'. Says who? Says you.
But why would a rational person ignore what you do?
So in addition to the myriad of patently false, unsubstantiated and easily refuted claims you have made, in response to having had your last YouTube blow up in your face you:
Do you notice something strange in the video you linked above? Did you notice that WTC7 is BACKWARDS in that video? The penthouse was on the LEFT, not the right.
Do you enjoy posting faked/hoaxed videos to try and further your beliefs Dale? Is this just another instance of you ceasing to research any further because you found something that agreed with what you believe? One has to think so because if you DID research further, you would have found this.
Just pathetic...
Comments?Dude, seriously...you are absolutely clueless......stop trying to "piggyback" off of your "me too" pal....it makes you look desperate....sheeesh.
Notice how you don't actually address any of the truck sized holes in the 'explosive demolition' theory.
1) How the towers came down exactly opposite of explosive demolition.
2) The absurdity of planting and hiding 50,000 cutter charges and their apparatus in an occupied building.
3) And the complete and utter lack of any cut girders, despite the explosive demolition theory requiring tens of thousands of them.
But pretending that these theory killing holes doesn't exist doesn't magically make them disappear. You can close your eyes, but you can't make *us* unsee just how awful your explanation is.
It would not take 50,000 cutter charges to bring either one of the two twin towers. If you watch the videos of that event, you can see the "squibs" that are going off ten floors below the free fall.
You clearly have no idea how actual controlled demolition works. First off, its bottom to top. With the structural supports being taken out at the bottom and kicker charges breaking up the building so it all falls together.
That's not how the towers fell *at all*. The towers fell top to bottom. With each floor destroyed, one at a time. Exactly opposite of controlled demolition. The supports on each floor would have to be destroyed. All 47 core columns and 249 outer panels.
Second, when an ACTUAL squib goes off, that section of the building falls like a train dropped from the sky. But your version of a 'squib' fires. And then....nothing. Nothing falls at the point of the explosion. Its not until the debris field reaches the location of the 'squib' that the location actually collapses.
Um, Dale....that's nothing like controlled demolition.
And of course, there are no cut girders. Controlled demolition cuts girders. The explosive demolition theory requiring 10s of thousands. And you have none.
That's layers and layers of obvious contradiction to your theory. And you close your eyes to all of it, pretending none of it exists. Why? Because 'nothing can convince you'. Says who? Says you.
But why would a rational person ignore what you do?
a) admit you were duped by the video hoax and slither away with your ignorant tail between your legs or;
b) move on to another subject without even a nanosecond of reflection on how silly, pointless and mendacious you've made yourself and your "Truther" cause look.
The question isn't really which course you chose but why ... why would you eagerly choose to make yourself look silly?
Comments?Notice how you don't actually address any of the truck sized holes in the 'explosive demolition' theory.
1) How the towers came down exactly opposite of explosive demolition.
2) The absurdity of planting and hiding 50,000 cutter charges and their apparatus in an occupied building.
3) And the complete and utter lack of any cut girders, despite the explosive demolition theory requiring tens of thousands of them.
But pretending that these theory killing holes doesn't exist doesn't magically make them disappear. You can close your eyes, but you can't make *us* unsee just how awful your explanation is.
It would not take 50,000 cutter charges to bring either one of the two twin towers. If you watch the videos of that event, you can see the "squibs" that are going off ten floors below the free fall.
You clearly have no idea how actual controlled demolition works. First off, its bottom to top. With the structural supports being taken out at the bottom and kicker charges breaking up the building so it all falls together.
That's not how the towers fell *at all*. The towers fell top to bottom. With each floor destroyed, one at a time. Exactly opposite of controlled demolition. The supports on each floor would have to be destroyed. All 47 core columns and 249 outer panels.
Second, when an ACTUAL squib goes off, that section of the building falls like a train dropped from the sky. But your version of a 'squib' fires. And then....nothing. Nothing falls at the point of the explosion. Its not until the debris field reaches the location of the 'squib' that the location actually collapses.
Um, Dale....that's nothing like controlled demolition.
And of course, there are no cut girders. Controlled demolition cuts girders. The explosive demolition theory requiring 10s of thousands. And you have none.
That's layers and layers of obvious contradiction to your theory. And you close your eyes to all of it, pretending none of it exists. Why? Because 'nothing can convince you'. Says who? Says you.
But why would a rational person ignore what you do?
a) admit you were duped by the video hoax and slither away with your ignorant tail between your legs or;
b) move on to another subject without even a nanosecond of reflection on how silly, pointless and mendacious you've made yourself and your "Truther" cause look.
The question isn't really which course you chose but why ... why would you eagerly choose to make yourself look silly?
Is there anything to Dale but running from his own horseshit?
I mean, if the truthers are about 'truth'.....why is so much of their argument demonstrably false?
Really? You mean you'll continue to post bogus claims and evidence? How quaint. Are you going to acknowledge that you posted a faked/hoaxed video of WTC7 as evidence of explosives? I would like to know how that slipped through your keen sense of truth after having researched 9/11 for as long and hard as you claim.You haven't posted anything that has given me pause for thought in the slightest because remember,
You mean you USED to research all aspects of a claim and then make a decision about it instead of passing it on even though it's faked/hoaxed.I use to be just like you.
Another false claim!!!!Both buildings were built to withstand a jet impact and to think that this alleged impact caused them to crumble to the ground in free fall fashion within hours is simply ludicrous now that I have educated myself....you might want to try it....open your eyes because things are not quite what they seem.
Why don't YOU hunt them down and ask what they think caused the sounds like explosions? You're the one who is interpreting what caused them, not them. They said they heard what sounded like explosions. Many things explode in a fire. Many things can sound like explosions that AREN'T from explosives.Numerous witnesses including firefighters attested to the fact that they heard a series of explosions in sequence...why don't you hunt them down and tell them that they didn't witness or hear what they did because after all, you know better....m'kay?
Like I have said MANY times before...I respect your right to not believe that 9/11 was an orchestrated event but yet you and your "cling on" pals can't seem to respond in kind...why is that? I would wager my life on the fact that USA.INC was behind this event along with the Mossad and Saudi Intel because it served a greater purpose. I could easily riducule you and your pals about your lack of knowledge on how the system really works and how this indentured servitude was put in place with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of 1933 but you don't have the knowledge that I do therefor it wouldn't be fair to take potshots at you and your little pals. You may get all weepy-eyed when you hear the National Anthem and believe in the good ol US of A and look at the flag as a symbol of freedom but I know differently and I have an understanding of how things really are that you couldn't even wrap your mind around. There is going to be a horrific event that is going to totally change life in an even more horrific way than it is now. We have rampant unemployment and under employment. 71 percent of the people that even have a job make less than 50K a year and 50K is chump change. 51 percent make leass than 30K and 38 percent made less than 20K. The dollar is facing a collapse that will make the crisis of 2008 seem like a mother's kiss and it is all by design. They have been watering down our nationalism with legal and illegal immigration while imposing draconian survelliance measures using the excuse that it has to be this way to "keep us safe". It is simply the Hegelian Dialectic "cause, affect, solution". Create the problem, wait for the emotional outcry and then propose a solution that gives "da gubermint" (that is corporate, by the way) more and more control over your privacy and liberties. BTW, you have never even broached the topic that if there was a legitimate terrorist threat, why wasn't the southern and northern borders secured? Hell, if you can fog a mirror and make it over the border, not only can you stay but "da gubermint" will give you a stipened and a place to live....imagine that?
Like I have said MANY times before...I respect your right to not believe that 9/11 was an orchestrated event but yet you and your "cling on" pals can't seem to respond in kind...why is that? I would wager my life on the fact that USA.INC was behind this event along with the Mossad and Saudi Intel because it served a greater purpose. I could easily riducule you and your pals about your lack of knowledge on how the system really works and how this indentured servitude was put in place with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of 1933 but you don't have the knowledge that I do therefor it wouldn't be fair to take potshots at you and your little pals. You may get all weepy-eyed when you hear the National Anthem and believe in the good ol US of A and look at the flag as a symbol of freedom but I know differently and I have an understanding of how things really are that you couldn't even wrap your mind around. There is going to be a horrific event that is going to totally change life in an even more horrific way than it is now. We have rampant unemployment and under employment. 71 percent of the people that even have a job make less than 50K a year and 50K is chump change. 51 percent make leass than 30K and 38 percent made less than 20K. The dollar is facing a collapse that will make the crisis of 2008 seem like a mother's kiss and it is all by design. They have been watering down our nationalism with legal and illegal immigration while imposing draconian survelliance measures using the excuse that it has to be this way to "keep us safe". It is simply the Hegelian Dialectic "cause, affect, solution". Create the problem, wait for the emotional outcry and then propose a solution that gives "da gubermint" (that is corporate, by the way) more and more control over your privacy and liberties. BTW, you have never even broached the topic that if there was a legitimate terrorist threat, why wasn't the southern and northern borders secured? Hell, if you can fog a mirror and make it over the border, not only can you stay but "da gubermint" will give you a stipened and a place to live....imagine that?
Why did you offer us a clearly fraudulent, manufactured, and fake video of WTC 7?
Like I have said MANY times before...I respect your right to not believe that 9/11 was an orchestrated event but yet you and your "cling on" pals can't seem to respond in kind...why is that? I would wager my life on the fact that USA.INC was behind this event along with the Mossad and Saudi Intel because it served a greater purpose. I could easily riducule you and your pals about your lack of knowledge on how the system really works and how this indentured servitude was put in place with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of 1933 but you don't have the knowledge that I do therefor it wouldn't be fair to take potshots at you and your little pals. You may get all weepy-eyed when you hear the National Anthem and believe in the good ol US of A and look at the flag as a symbol of freedom but I know differently and I have an understanding of how things really are that you couldn't even wrap your mind around. There is going to be a horrific event that is going to totally change life in an even more horrific way than it is now. We have rampant unemployment and under employment. 71 percent of the people that even have a job make less than 50K a year and 50K is chump change. 51 percent make leass than 30K and 38 percent made less than 20K. The dollar is facing a collapse that will make the crisis of 2008 seem like a mother's kiss and it is all by design. They have been watering down our nationalism with legal and illegal immigration while imposing draconian survelliance measures using the excuse that it has to be this way to "keep us safe". It is simply the Hegelian Dialectic "cause, affect, solution". Create the problem, wait for the emotional outcry and then propose a solution that gives "da gubermint" (that is corporate, by the way) more and more control over your privacy and liberties. BTW, you have never even broached the topic that if there was a legitimate terrorist threat, why wasn't the southern and northern borders secured? Hell, if you can fog a mirror and make it over the border, not only can you stay but "da gubermint" will give you a stipened and a place to live....imagine that?
Why did you offer us a clearly fraudulent, manufactured, and fake video of WTC 7?
Like I have said MANY times before...I respect your right to not believe that 9/11 was an orchestrated event but yet you and your "cling on" pals can't seem to respond in kind...why is that? I would wager my life on the fact that USA.INC was behind this event along with the Mossad and Saudi Intel because it served a greater purpose. I could easily riducule you and your pals about your lack of knowledge on how the system really works and how this indentured servitude was put in place with the Chapter 11 bankruptcy of 1933 but you don't have the knowledge that I do therefor it wouldn't be fair to take potshots at you and your little pals. You may get all weepy-eyed when you hear the National Anthem and believe in the good ol US of A and look at the flag as a symbol of freedom but I know differently and I have an understanding of how things really are that you couldn't even wrap your mind around. There is going to be a horrific event that is going to totally change life in an even more horrific way than it is now. We have rampant unemployment and under employment. 71 percent of the people that even have a job make less than 50K a year and 50K is chump change. 51 percent make leass than 30K and 38 percent made less than 20K. The dollar is facing a collapse that will make the crisis of 2008 seem like a mother's kiss and it is all by design. They have been watering down our nationalism with legal and illegal immigration while imposing draconian survelliance measures using the excuse that it has to be this way to "keep us safe". It is simply the Hegelian Dialectic "cause, affect, solution". Create the problem, wait for the emotional outcry and then propose a solution that gives "da gubermint" (that is corporate, by the way) more and more control over your privacy and liberties. BTW, you have never even broached the topic that if there was a legitimate terrorist threat, why wasn't the southern and northern borders secured? Hell, if you can fog a mirror and make it over the border, not only can you stay but "da gubermint" will give you a stipened and a place to live....imagine that?
Why did you offer us a clearly fraudulent, manufactured, and fake video of WTC 7?
Dale,Notice, if you will.....the righthand side of the windows.......why was FEMA already in New York city the day before?? Hmmmmm?
What are you talking about?! I (and others) have posted proof that proves your claims are garbage, yet you ignore what was posted. You clearly run from the evidence we post and act like a child by changing the subject or just ignoring it all together.Like I have said MANY times before...I respect your right to not believe that 9/11 was an orchestrated event but yet you and your "cling on" pals can't seem to respond in kind...why is that?
No you don't. Not even close. If you did, you would engage in debate when opposing evidence is provided against YOUR claim. As has been said here many times, all you do is change the subject or ignore the evidence provided, stick your fingers in your ears and yell "la la la la la".Like I have said MANY times before...I respect your right to not believe that 9/11
They weren't...why was FEMA already in New York city the day before?? Hmmmmm?
