what happened on 9/11/2001?

[SAYIT]

It looks like Daws is having trouble trying to manufacture fires in the Banker's Trust building.

Here is The FEMA report regarding the building and it's damage. FEMA concluded no fires in combination with the architectural damage from falling debris.

Chapter 6 - Bankers Trust Building - The WTC Report.

Only a mirror remains of the report unless one has a hard copy (which I do).

6.5 Fireproofing

The structural steel sections were fireproofed with a spray-applied non-asbestos fireproofing material. The thickness on the beam flanges was observed to be on the order of 1/2 inch thick. Many of the rolled steel shapes appeared to be almost completely bare of fireproofing where directly impacted by debris; the remainder of the fireproofing appeared intact even in the damaged areas. Because fires were not ignited in combination with this structural damage, the damaged fireproofing did not affect the performance of the building.


Glad to help, Daws. Now, you wanna take another swing?

so you agree there were fires. just not large enough to cause major structural damage?

the subject of your favorite photo is not major and btw :
Mission
9-11 Research critically examines the official government explanation of the attack and concludes that many of its key assertions are impossible. We do not pretend to know exactly how the attack was carried out or exactly who the perpetrators are, but there are plausible scenarios of how the attack could have been executed by insiders. (See our Frequently Asked Questions.)
If the attack was indeed a "black-op", then we can expect that the operatives will have hidden their identities behind layer upon layer of cover story. Only a genuine investigation with meaningful powers will be able to peel away the layers of deception to expose the true perpetrators. We hope to facilitate such an investigation by first exposing the falsity of the outermost cover story: the official myth of 9/11/01.
We intend for our work to honor the many victims of this horrendous attack. Many people will find it difficult and traumatic to confront the idea that the attack was the work, not of a religious extremist living in caves in Central Asia, but of people within the U.S. government. Apologists for the official story ridicule such ideas, and attempt to confuse compassion for the victims with certainty that bin Laden was the perpetrator. In fact, genuine compassion consists of learning and spreading the truth in order that future repetitions of such murderous frauds may be prevented.

Who We Are
9-11 Research is a research consortium consisting of just a few individuals volunteering their time and resources to the effort. The principal contributors to the site are:

• Jim Hoffman, Webmaster and Senior Editor
• Gregg Roberts, Associate Editor
• Jan Hoyer, Outreach Coordinator

Jim Hoffman created the website and wrote the vast majority of its original content. Hoffman has a background in software engineering, mechanical engineering, and scientific visualization. Hoffman also created the Web publishing system used to maintain the 9-11 Research website.
Gregg Roberts has been investigating the September 11 attack since December 2003 and has provided extensive editorial assistance to 911Research. He authored the essay Where Are the 9/11 Whistleblowers?, and is working with Hoffman to produce a book based on the site. Roberts is a technical writer and business analyst with a bachelor's degree in psychology, master's-level study in social work, and earlier education in the "hard" sciences.
Jan Hoyer is a former founding board member and graphic designer for the National 9/11 Visibilty Project, 911Truth.org and the D.C Emergency Truth Convergence. Hoyer has a degree in graphic design and experience in online multimedia.

your report is a second hand account from a non credible site.

there are no engineers or builders or qualified scientist among it ranks.
as wit all Truth sites it is a steaming pile of speculation.
almost forgot, your claim was there were NO FIRES at all in the bankers trust that is false.
and that was my point.

When compared to the PROFESSIONALS who produced the NIST report the 9/11 CT World comes up woefully short yet not one of these foil-hatted "Truthers" manages to view their "facts" with the same skepticism they reserve strictly for the official findings.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

It looks like Daws is having trouble trying to manufacture fires in the Banker's Trust building.

Here is The FEMA report regarding the building and it's damage. FEMA concluded no fires in combination with the architectural damage from falling debris.

Chapter 6 - Bankers Trust Building - The WTC Report.

Only a mirror remains of the report unless one has a hard copy (which I do).

6.5 Fireproofing

The structural steel sections were fireproofed with a spray-applied non-asbestos fireproofing material. The thickness on the beam flanges was observed to be on the order of 1/2 inch thick. Many of the rolled steel shapes appeared to be almost completely bare of fireproofing where directly impacted by debris; the remainder of the fireproofing appeared intact even in the damaged areas. Because fires were not ignited in combination with this structural damage, the damaged fireproofing did not affect the performance of the building.


Glad to help, Daws. Now, you wanna take another swing?

so you agree there were fires. just not large enough to cause major structural damage?

the subject of your favorite photo is not major and btw :
Mission
9-11 Research critically examines the official government explanation of the attack and concludes that many of its key assertions are impossible. We do not pretend to know exactly how the attack was carried out or exactly who the perpetrators are, but there are plausible scenarios of how the attack could have been executed by insiders. (See our Frequently Asked Questions.)
If the attack was indeed a "black-op", then we can expect that the operatives will have hidden their identities behind layer upon layer of cover story. Only a genuine investigation with meaningful powers will be able to peel away the layers of deception to expose the true perpetrators. We hope to facilitate such an investigation by first exposing the falsity of the outermost cover story: the official myth of 9/11/01.
We intend for our work to honor the many victims of this horrendous attack. Many people will find it difficult and traumatic to confront the idea that the attack was the work, not of a religious extremist living in caves in Central Asia, but of people within the U.S. government. Apologists for the official story ridicule such ideas, and attempt to confuse compassion for the victims with certainty that bin Laden was the perpetrator. In fact, genuine compassion consists of learning and spreading the truth in order that future repetitions of such murderous frauds may be prevented.

Who We Are
9-11 Research is a research consortium consisting of just a few individuals volunteering their time and resources to the effort. The principal contributors to the site are:

• Jim Hoffman, Webmaster and Senior Editor
• Gregg Roberts, Associate Editor
• Jan Hoyer, Outreach Coordinator

Jim Hoffman created the website and wrote the vast majority of its original content. Hoffman has a background in software engineering, mechanical engineering, and scientific visualization. Hoffman also created the Web publishing system used to maintain the 9-11 Research website.
Gregg Roberts has been investigating the September 11 attack since December 2003 and has provided extensive editorial assistance to 911Research. He authored the essay Where Are the 9/11 Whistleblowers?, and is working with Hoffman to produce a book based on the site. Roberts is a technical writer and business analyst with a bachelor's degree in psychology, master's-level study in social work, and earlier education in the "hard" sciences.
Jan Hoyer is a former founding board member and graphic designer for the National 9/11 Visibilty Project, 911Truth.org and the D.C Emergency Truth Convergence. Hoyer has a degree in graphic design and experience in online multimedia.

your report is a second hand account from a non credible site.

there are no engineers or builders or qualified scientist among it ranks.
as wit all Truth sites it is a steaming pile of speculation.
almost forgot, your claim was there were NO FIRES at all in the bankers trust that is false.
and that was my point.

When compared to the PROFESSIONALS who produced the NIST report the 9/11 CT World comes up woefully short yet not one of these foil-hatted "Truthers" manages to view their "facts" with the same skepticism they reserve strictly for the official findings.

Oh, that was a good ad hominem! Unfortunately for you and your butt-buddy, The Great Daws Dullard, the mirror to the FEMA report comes from the Guardian UK. I realize this is WAY too complicated for someone of your caliber. You couldn't even keep up with which building was being discussed.

 

[SAYIT]

It looks like Daws is having trouble trying to manufacture fires in the Banker's Trust building.

Here is The FEMA report regarding the building and it's damage. FEMA concluded no fires in combination with the architectural damage from falling debris.

Chapter 6 - Bankers Trust Building - The WTC Report.

Only a mirror remains of the report unless one has a hard copy (which I do).

6.5 Fireproofing

The structural steel sections were fireproofed with a spray-applied non-asbestos fireproofing material. The thickness on the beam flanges was observed to be on the order of 1/2 inch thick. Many of the rolled steel shapes appeared to be almost completely bare of fireproofing where directly impacted by debris; the remainder of the fireproofing appeared intact even in the damaged areas. Because fires were not ignited in combination with this structural damage, the damaged fireproofing did not affect the performance of the building.


Glad to help, Daws. Now, you wanna take another swing?

so you agree there were fires. just not large enough to cause major structural damage?

the subject of your favorite photo is not major and btw :
Mission
9-11 Research critically examines the official government explanation of the attack and concludes that many of its key assertions are impossible. We do not pretend to know exactly how the attack was carried out or exactly who the perpetrators are, but there are plausible scenarios of how the attack could have been executed by insiders. (See our Frequently Asked Questions.)
If the attack was indeed a "black-op", then we can expect that the operatives will have hidden their identities behind layer upon layer of cover story. Only a genuine investigation with meaningful powers will be able to peel away the layers of deception to expose the true perpetrators. We hope to facilitate such an investigation by first exposing the falsity of the outermost cover story: the official myth of 9/11/01.
We intend for our work to honor the many victims of this horrendous attack. Many people will find it difficult and traumatic to confront the idea that the attack was the work, not of a religious extremist living in caves in Central Asia, but of people within the U.S. government. Apologists for the official story ridicule such ideas, and attempt to confuse compassion for the victims with certainty that bin Laden was the perpetrator. In fact, genuine compassion consists of learning and spreading the truth in order that future repetitions of such murderous frauds may be prevented.

Who We Are
9-11 Research is a research consortium consisting of just a few individuals volunteering their time and resources to the effort. The principal contributors to the site are:

• Jim Hoffman, Webmaster and Senior Editor
• Gregg Roberts, Associate Editor
• Jan Hoyer, Outreach Coordinator

Jim Hoffman created the website and wrote the vast majority of its original content. Hoffman has a background in software engineering, mechanical engineering, and scientific visualization. Hoffman also created the Web publishing system used to maintain the 9-11 Research website.
Gregg Roberts has been investigating the September 11 attack since December 2003 and has provided extensive editorial assistance to 911Research. He authored the essay Where Are the 9/11 Whistleblowers?, and is working with Hoffman to produce a book based on the site. Roberts is a technical writer and business analyst with a bachelor's degree in psychology, master's-level study in social work, and earlier education in the "hard" sciences.
Jan Hoyer is a former founding board member and graphic designer for the National 9/11 Visibilty Project, 911Truth.org and the D.C Emergency Truth Convergence. Hoyer has a degree in graphic design and experience in online multimedia.

your report is a second hand account from a non credible site.

there are no engineers or builders or qualified scientist among it ranks.
as wit all Truth sites it is a steaming pile of speculation.
almost forgot, your claim was there were NO FIRES at all in the bankers trust that is false.
and that was my point.

When compared to the PROFESSIONALS who produced the NIST report the 9/11 CT World comes up woefully short yet not one of these foil-hatted "Truthers" manages to view their "facts" with the same skepticism they reserve strictly for the official findings.

Oh, that was a good ad hominem! Unfortunately for you and your butt-buddy, The Great Daws Dullard, the mirror to the FEMA report comes from the Guardian UK. I realize this is WAY too complicated for someone of your caliber. You couldn't even keep up with which building was being discussed.

In order to keep up with you, Princess, I'd need a radical lobotomy.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

It looks like Daws is having trouble trying to manufacture fires in the Banker's Trust building.

Here is The FEMA report regarding the building and it's damage. FEMA concluded no fires in combination with the architectural damage from falling debris.

Chapter 6 - Bankers Trust Building - The WTC Report.

Only a mirror remains of the report unless one has a hard copy (which I do).

6.5 Fireproofing

The structural steel sections were fireproofed with a spray-applied non-asbestos fireproofing material. The thickness on the beam flanges was observed to be on the order of 1/2 inch thick. Many of the rolled steel shapes appeared to be almost completely bare of fireproofing where directly impacted by debris; the remainder of the fireproofing appeared intact even in the damaged areas. Because fires were not ignited in combination with this structural damage, the damaged fireproofing did not affect the performance of the building.


Glad to help, Daws. Now, you wanna take another swing?

so you agree there were fires. just not large enough to cause major structural damage?

the subject of your favorite photo is not major and btw :
Mission
9-11 Research critically examines the official government explanation of the attack and concludes that many of its key assertions are impossible. We do not pretend to know exactly how the attack was carried out or exactly who the perpetrators are, but there are plausible scenarios of how the attack could have been executed by insiders. (See our Frequently Asked Questions.)
If the attack was indeed a "black-op", then we can expect that the operatives will have hidden their identities behind layer upon layer of cover story. Only a genuine investigation with meaningful powers will be able to peel away the layers of deception to expose the true perpetrators. We hope to facilitate such an investigation by first exposing the falsity of the outermost cover story: the official myth of 9/11/01.
We intend for our work to honor the many victims of this horrendous attack. Many people will find it difficult and traumatic to confront the idea that the attack was the work, not of a religious extremist living in caves in Central Asia, but of people within the U.S. government. Apologists for the official story ridicule such ideas, and attempt to confuse compassion for the victims with certainty that bin Laden was the perpetrator. In fact, genuine compassion consists of learning and spreading the truth in order that future repetitions of such murderous frauds may be prevented.

Who We Are
9-11 Research is a research consortium consisting of just a few individuals volunteering their time and resources to the effort. The principal contributors to the site are:

• Jim Hoffman, Webmaster and Senior Editor
• Gregg Roberts, Associate Editor
• Jan Hoyer, Outreach Coordinator

Jim Hoffman created the website and wrote the vast majority of its original content. Hoffman has a background in software engineering, mechanical engineering, and scientific visualization. Hoffman also created the Web publishing system used to maintain the 9-11 Research website.
Gregg Roberts has been investigating the September 11 attack since December 2003 and has provided extensive editorial assistance to 911Research. He authored the essay Where Are the 9/11 Whistleblowers?, and is working with Hoffman to produce a book based on the site. Roberts is a technical writer and business analyst with a bachelor's degree in psychology, master's-level study in social work, and earlier education in the "hard" sciences.
Jan Hoyer is a former founding board member and graphic designer for the National 9/11 Visibilty Project, 911Truth.org and the D.C Emergency Truth Convergence. Hoyer has a degree in graphic design and experience in online multimedia.

your report is a second hand account from a non credible site.

there are no engineers or builders or qualified scientist among it ranks.
as wit all Truth sites it is a steaming pile of speculation.
almost forgot, your claim was there were NO FIRES at all in the bankers trust that is false.
and that was my point.

When compared to the PROFESSIONALS who produced the NIST report the 9/11 CT World comes up woefully short yet not one of these foil-hatted "Truthers" manages to view their "facts" with the same skepticism they reserve strictly for the official findings.

Oh, that was a good ad hominem! Unfortunately for you and your butt-buddy, The Great Daws Dullard, the mirror to the FEMA report comes from the Guardian UK. I realize this is WAY too complicated for someone of your caliber. You couldn't even keep up with which building was being discussed.

In order to keep up with you, Princess, I'd need a radical lobotomy.

Oh, good one! We've got ourselves a regular laughterbater over here. still too dumb to follow along though...

 

[Skylar]

It looks like Daws is having trouble trying to manufacture fires in the Banker's Trust building.

Here is The FEMA report regarding the building and it's damage. FEMA concluded no fires in combination with the architectural damage from falling debris.

Chapter 6 - Bankers Trust Building - The WTC Report.

Only a mirror remains of the report unless one has a hard copy (which I do).

6.5 Fireproofing

The structural steel sections were fireproofed with a spray-applied non-asbestos fireproofing material. The thickness on the beam flanges was observed to be on the order of 1/2 inch thick. Many of the rolled steel shapes appeared to be almost completely bare of fireproofing where directly impacted by debris; the remainder of the fireproofing appeared intact even in the damaged areas. Because fires were not ignited in combination with this structural damage, the damaged fireproofing did not affect the performance of the building.


Glad to help, Daws. Now, you wanna take another swing?

so you agree there were fires. just not large enough to cause major structural damage?

the subject of your favorite photo is not major and btw :
Mission
9-11 Research critically examines the official government explanation of the attack and concludes that many of its key assertions are impossible. We do not pretend to know exactly how the attack was carried out or exactly who the perpetrators are, but there are plausible scenarios of how the attack could have been executed by insiders. (See our Frequently Asked Questions.)
If the attack was indeed a "black-op", then we can expect that the operatives will have hidden their identities behind layer upon layer of cover story. Only a genuine investigation with meaningful powers will be able to peel away the layers of deception to expose the true perpetrators. We hope to facilitate such an investigation by first exposing the falsity of the outermost cover story: the official myth of 9/11/01.
We intend for our work to honor the many victims of this horrendous attack. Many people will find it difficult and traumatic to confront the idea that the attack was the work, not of a religious extremist living in caves in Central Asia, but of people within the U.S. government. Apologists for the official story ridicule such ideas, and attempt to confuse compassion for the victims with certainty that bin Laden was the perpetrator. In fact, genuine compassion consists of learning and spreading the truth in order that future repetitions of such murderous frauds may be prevented.

Who We Are
9-11 Research is a research consortium consisting of just a few individuals volunteering their time and resources to the effort. The principal contributors to the site are:

• Jim Hoffman, Webmaster and Senior Editor
• Gregg Roberts, Associate Editor
• Jan Hoyer, Outreach Coordinator

Jim Hoffman created the website and wrote the vast majority of its original content. Hoffman has a background in software engineering, mechanical engineering, and scientific visualization. Hoffman also created the Web publishing system used to maintain the 9-11 Research website.
Gregg Roberts has been investigating the September 11 attack since December 2003 and has provided extensive editorial assistance to 911Research. He authored the essay Where Are the 9/11 Whistleblowers?, and is working with Hoffman to produce a book based on the site. Roberts is a technical writer and business analyst with a bachelor's degree in psychology, master's-level study in social work, and earlier education in the "hard" sciences.
Jan Hoyer is a former founding board member and graphic designer for the National 9/11 Visibilty Project, 911Truth.org and the D.C Emergency Truth Convergence. Hoyer has a degree in graphic design and experience in online multimedia.

your report is a second hand account from a non credible site.

there are no engineers or builders or qualified scientist among it ranks.
as wit all Truth sites it is a steaming pile of speculation.
almost forgot, your claim was there were NO FIRES at all in the bankers trust that is false.
and that was my point.

When compared to the PROFESSIONALS who produced the NIST report the 9/11 CT World comes up woefully short yet not one of these foil-hatted "Truthers" manages to view their "facts" with the same skepticism they reserve strictly for the official findings.

Well that's just it. Truther's don't give a fiddler's fuck about 'truth'. They want their story, regardless of the holes in it. Which is why when asked about the gapping, bleeding holes in their 'bomb' theory, they refuse to discuss it.

They don't want to know the truth. Truther's don't want to hear anything that contradicts their world view.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

It looks like Daws is having trouble trying to manufacture fires in the Banker's Trust building.

Here is The FEMA report regarding the building and it's damage. FEMA concluded no fires in combination with the architectural damage from falling debris.

Chapter 6 - Bankers Trust Building - The WTC Report.

Only a mirror remains of the report unless one has a hard copy (which I do).

6.5 Fireproofing

The structural steel sections were fireproofed with a spray-applied non-asbestos fireproofing material. The thickness on the beam flanges was observed to be on the order of 1/2 inch thick. Many of the rolled steel shapes appeared to be almost completely bare of fireproofing where directly impacted by debris; the remainder of the fireproofing appeared intact even in the damaged areas. Because fires were not ignited in combination with this structural damage, the damaged fireproofing did not affect the performance of the building.


Glad to help, Daws. Now, you wanna take another swing?

so you agree there were fires. just not large enough to cause major structural damage?

the subject of your favorite photo is not major and btw :
Mission
9-11 Research critically examines the official government explanation of the attack and concludes that many of its key assertions are impossible. We do not pretend to know exactly how the attack was carried out or exactly who the perpetrators are, but there are plausible scenarios of how the attack could have been executed by insiders. (See our Frequently Asked Questions.)
If the attack was indeed a "black-op", then we can expect that the operatives will have hidden their identities behind layer upon layer of cover story. Only a genuine investigation with meaningful powers will be able to peel away the layers of deception to expose the true perpetrators. We hope to facilitate such an investigation by first exposing the falsity of the outermost cover story: the official myth of 9/11/01.
We intend for our work to honor the many victims of this horrendous attack. Many people will find it difficult and traumatic to confront the idea that the attack was the work, not of a religious extremist living in caves in Central Asia, but of people within the U.S. government. Apologists for the official story ridicule such ideas, and attempt to confuse compassion for the victims with certainty that bin Laden was the perpetrator. In fact, genuine compassion consists of learning and spreading the truth in order that future repetitions of such murderous frauds may be prevented.

Who We Are
9-11 Research is a research consortium consisting of just a few individuals volunteering their time and resources to the effort. The principal contributors to the site are:

• Jim Hoffman, Webmaster and Senior Editor
• Gregg Roberts, Associate Editor
• Jan Hoyer, Outreach Coordinator

Jim Hoffman created the website and wrote the vast majority of its original content. Hoffman has a background in software engineering, mechanical engineering, and scientific visualization. Hoffman also created the Web publishing system used to maintain the 9-11 Research website.
Gregg Roberts has been investigating the September 11 attack since December 2003 and has provided extensive editorial assistance to 911Research. He authored the essay Where Are the 9/11 Whistleblowers?, and is working with Hoffman to produce a book based on the site. Roberts is a technical writer and business analyst with a bachelor's degree in psychology, master's-level study in social work, and earlier education in the "hard" sciences.
Jan Hoyer is a former founding board member and graphic designer for the National 9/11 Visibilty Project, 911Truth.org and the D.C Emergency Truth Convergence. Hoyer has a degree in graphic design and experience in online multimedia.

your report is a second hand account from a non credible site.

there are no engineers or builders or qualified scientist among it ranks.
as wit all Truth sites it is a steaming pile of speculation.
almost forgot, your claim was there were NO FIRES at all in the bankers trust that is false.
and that was my point.

When compared to the PROFESSIONALS who produced the NIST report the 9/11 CT World comes up woefully short yet not one of these foil-hatted "Truthers" manages to view their "facts" with the same skepticism they reserve strictly for the official findings.

Well that's just it. Truther's don't give a fiddler's fuck about 'truth'. They want their story, regardless of the holes in it. Which is why when asked about the gapping, bleeding holes in their 'bomb' theory, they refuse to discuss it.

They don't want to know the truth. Truther's don't want to hear anything that contradicts their world view.

So, I have to post the same reply 3 times?



The mirror is from the guardian. I told you, you can get this in hard copy. You fucks ae still failing on this point.

 

[Skylar]

And yet when I ask you and your ilk about say, the FDNY and their assement that WTC 7 fell due to fire and structural damage, or the complete lack of any girders cut by explosives, or the utter lack of any thermite reactions ever observed.....anywhere at ground zero, despite the thermite theory requiring 10,000s, or why no residue of explosives were ever found, or where the thermite canisters were in the debris, or how such a system would operate on fire, or why the Port Authority Bomb squad found no bombs and neither did their bomb sniffing dogs, or how the WTC 7 fell is virtual silence, and there's no such thing as silent bombs....

.......you start babbling about 'moved goal posts' and refuse to discuss any of it.

Which is exactly what I'm talking about. If truther's were interested in 'truth', they'd be as interested in the massive, truck sized holes in their own conspiracies as they are any account from the government.

But they aren't. Most Truthers, just like you, have no interest in discussing any hole, inconsistency, or enormous contradiction in their theories.

Demonstrating elegantly that they are more interested in clinging to their story than they are in the truth.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

And yet when I ask you and your ilk about say, the FDNY and their assement that WTC 7 fell due to fire and structural damage, or the complete lack of any girders cut by explosives, or the utter lack of any thermite reactions ever observed.....anywhere at ground zero, despite the thermite theory requiring 10,000s, or why no residue of explosives were ever found, or where the thermite canisters were in the debris, or how such a system would operate on fire, or why the Port Authority Bomb squad found no bombs and neither did their bomb sniffing dogs, or how the WTC 7 fell is virtual silence, and there's no such thing as silent bombs....

.......you start babbling about 'moved goal posts' and refuse to discuss any of it.

Which is exactly what I'm talking about. If truther's were interested in 'truth', they'd be as interested in the massive, truck sized holes in their own conspiracies as they are any account from the government.

But they aren't. Most Truthers, just like you, have no interest in discussing any hole, inconsistency, or enormous contradiction in their theories.

Demonstrating elegantly that they are more interested in clinging to their story than they are in the truth.

So, you're going to play repeater like Daws and SAYIT? Is this a scripted endeavor?

 

[SAYIT]

And yet when I ask you and your ilk about say, the FDNY and their assement that WTC 7 fell due to fire and structural damage, or the complete lack of any girders cut by explosives, or the utter lack of any thermite reactions ever observed.....anywhere at ground zero, despite the thermite theory requiring 10,000s, or why no residue of explosives were ever found, or where the thermite canisters were in the debris, or how such a system would operate on fire, or why the Port Authority Bomb squad found no bombs and neither did their bomb sniffing dogs, or how the WTC 7 fell is virtual silence, and there's no such thing as silent bombs....

.......you start babbling about 'moved goal posts' and refuse to discuss any of it.

Which is exactly what I'm talking about. If truther's were interested in 'truth', they'd be as interested in the massive, truck sized holes in their own conspiracies as they are any account from the government.

But they aren't. Most Truthers, just like you, have no interest in discussing any hole, inconsistency, or enormous contradiction in their theories.

Demonstrating elegantly that they are more interested in clinging to their story than they are in the truth.

So, you're going to play repeater like Daws and SAYIT? Is this a scripted endeavor?

It's the end game, Princess ... the bottom line. There is no point in following you down the same old rabbit into which you "Truthers" have been sliding (and attempting to drag others) for 13+ years. Those who dispute your silliness here have seen and heard all you have to say and when compared to the exhaustive (if imperfect) NIST findings, "Truther" conclusions come up lame and even irrational, as though driven by something other than a search for the truth. Let me simplify it for you: after 13+ years the 9/11 CT Movement has produced absolutely nothing of value ... zippo ... zilch ... nada.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"what happened on 9/11/2001?"

It marked the beginning of one of the more moronic conspiracy theories.

 

[Skylar]

And yet when I ask you and your ilk about say, the FDNY and their assement that WTC 7 fell due to fire and structural damage, or the complete lack of any girders cut by explosives, or the utter lack of any thermite reactions ever observed.....anywhere at ground zero, despite the thermite theory requiring 10,000s, or why no residue of explosives were ever found, or where the thermite canisters were in the debris, or how such a system would operate on fire, or why the Port Authority Bomb squad found no bombs and neither did their bomb sniffing dogs, or how the WTC 7 fell is virtual silence, and there's no such thing as silent bombs....

.......you start babbling about 'moved goal posts' and refuse to discuss any of it.

Which is exactly what I'm talking about. If truther's were interested in 'truth', they'd be as interested in the massive, truck sized holes in their own conspiracies as they are any account from the government.

But they aren't. Most Truthers, just like you, have no interest in discussing any hole, inconsistency, or enormous contradiction in their theories.

Demonstrating elegantly that they are more interested in clinging to their story than they are in the truth.

So, you're going to play repeater like Daws and SAYIT? Is this a scripted endeavor?

And shocker.....another truther avoids the truth. Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.

This, among so many more reasons, is why truthers are a national laughing stock. They're more interested in clinging to their silly little stories than they are in actually finding the truth.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.

I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

And yet when I ask you and your ilk about say, the FDNY and their assement that WTC 7 fell due to fire and structural damage, or the complete lack of any girders cut by explosives, or the utter lack of any thermite reactions ever observed.....anywhere at ground zero, despite the thermite theory requiring 10,000s, or why no residue of explosives were ever found, or where the thermite canisters were in the debris, or how such a system would operate on fire, or why the Port Authority Bomb squad found no bombs and neither did their bomb sniffing dogs, or how the WTC 7 fell is virtual silence, and there's no such thing as silent bombs....

.......you start babbling about 'moved goal posts' and refuse to discuss any of it.

Which is exactly what I'm talking about. If truther's were interested in 'truth', they'd be as interested in the massive, truck sized holes in their own conspiracies as they are any account from the government.

But they aren't. Most Truthers, just like you, have no interest in discussing any hole, inconsistency, or enormous contradiction in their theories.

Demonstrating elegantly that they are more interested in clinging to their story than they are in the truth.

So, you're going to play repeater like Daws and SAYIT? Is this a scripted endeavor?

It's the end game, Princess ... the bottom line. There is no point in following you down the same old rabbit into which you "Truthers" have been sliding (and attempting to drag others) for 13+ years. Those who dispute your silliness here have seen and heard all you have to say and when compared to the exhaustive (if imperfect) NIST findings, "Truther" conclusions come up lame and even irrational, as though driven by something other than a search for the truth. Let me simplify it for you: after 13+ years the 9/11 CT Movement has produced absolutely nothing of value ... zippo ... zilch ... nada.

 

[Judicial review]

Really?

 

[SAYIT]

"what happened on 9/11/2001?"

It marked the beginning of one of the more moronic conspiracy theories.

Dozens of them actually and the authors ridicule each other's versions while adjusting their own foil hats. In fact, the "Truther" field is so littered with ludicrous 9/11 scenarios that some even contend that mis and disinformationalists are at work trying to discredit their particular lunacy and their movement in general. Hilarious.

 

[Skylar]

Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.

I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.

No, but you were presented with several. And ran exactly like I said you would for one very simple reason:

People like you don't want the truth. They want their story. And if anyone asks them any question that doesn't ape their story, notes any hole ...no matter how enormous...in their reasoning, your ilk straight up ignore them.

No one actually interested in truth ever would.

 

[deep_space]

Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.

George Washington -


Love the Quote!

and as for the topic at hand
did anybody actually take Science101 and earn a passing grade?
REALLY?

 

[Skylar]

"what happened on 9/11/2001?"

It marked the beginning of one of the more moronic conspiracy theories.

Dozens of them actually and the authors ridicule each other's versions while adjusting their own foil hats. In fact, the "Truther" field is so littered with ludicrous 9/11 scenarios that some even contend that mis and disinformationalists are at work trying to discredit their particular lunacy and their movement in general. Hilarious.

My personal favorite? Judy Wood and her 'directed energy weapons from space' conspiracy. I'm not making this up. Phasers. That's literally her explanation.

She has diagrams and charts and everything. Like most truther conspiracies, its laughably bullshit. But she believes.

You can't fix stupid.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.

I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.

No, but you were presented with several. And ran exactly like I said you would for one very simple reason:

People like you don't want the truth. They want their story. And if anyone asks them any question that doesn't ape their story, notes any hole ...no matter how enormous...in their reasoning, your ilk straight up ignore them.

No one actually interested in truth ever would.

OK, Corky. Keep swing that whiffle ball bat around.

 

[daws101]

And yet when I ask you and your ilk about say, the FDNY and their assement that WTC 7 fell due to fire and structural damage, or the complete lack of any girders cut by explosives, or the utter lack of any thermite reactions ever observed.....anywhere at ground zero, despite the thermite theory requiring 10,000s, or why no residue of explosives were ever found, or where the thermite canisters were in the debris, or how such a system would operate on fire, or why the Port Authority Bomb squad found no bombs and neither did their bomb sniffing dogs, or how the WTC 7 fell is virtual silence, and there's no such thing as silent bombs....

.......you start babbling about 'moved goal posts' and refuse to discuss any of it.

Which is exactly what I'm talking about. If truther's were interested in 'truth', they'd be as interested in the massive, truck sized holes in their own conspiracies as they are any account from the government.

But they aren't. Most Truthers, just like you, have no interest in discussing any hole, inconsistency, or enormous contradiction in their theories.

Demonstrating elegantly that they are more interested in clinging to their story than they are in the truth.

So, you're going to play repeater like Daws and SAYIT? Is this a scripted endeavor?

lol! you've no room to yammer about repetition you and the circle jerk club have argued the same bullshit since 2001.