Is there a legitimate reason to question the official narrative*?

[ozeco41]

I don't need to explain every event that occurred on 911 to say there needs to be a new investigation into who was behind the building collapses.

Correct Tony.

This spreading false meme of debunkers needs eradicating IMO.

"You cannot claim CD at WTC unless you provide a full alternate hypothesis for all of 9/11" Hogwash.

If you claim CD at WTC that is all you have to prove. Demands that you prove all other aspects of 9/11 are improper.

I will press you as hard as anyone to meet your burden of proof. But only for whatever claim of yours is the current topic of discussion or argument. Sure I won't accept reversed burden of disproof. BUT I will never demand that you explain the plane at the Pentagon before I will accept your proof of CD at WTC.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

This getting ridiculous. There are ample photos and videos both showing the bowing and that it preceded the collapse. That you demand video of one particular face is truly bizarre, and I can only assume it's because you know there is no such video.

My point is stronger than you give it credit for.

There is no video of inward bowing of the North Tower's south face minutes before collapse and nobody (including NIST) can provide a mechanism to cause it. Usually this means it didn't happen.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Correct Tony.

This spreading false meme of debunkers needs eradicating IMO.

"You cannot claim CD at WTC unless you provide a full alternate hypothesis for all of 9/11" Hogwash.

If you claim CD at WTC that is all you have to prove. Demands that you prove all other aspects of 9/11 are improper.

I will press you as hard as anyone to meet your burden of proof. But only for whatever claim of yours is the current topic of discussion or argument. Sure I won't accept reversed burden of disproof. BUT I will never demand that you explain the plane at the Pentagon before I will accept your proof of CD at WTC.

Thanks for at least recognizing that showing one part of an explanation doesn't work is all that is necessary to have at least that part re-explained, which in this case requires a re-investigation of the building collapses.

 

[carlitos]

which in this case requires a re-investigation of the building collapses.

Thousandth time asking - what's stopping you and your organization from investigating anything?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Thousandth time asking - what's stopping you and your organization from investigating anything?

I guess it would be your thousandth disingenuous post. Don't you have anything real to contribute?

 

[GlennB]

My point is stronger than you give it credit for.

There is no video of inward bowing of the North Tower's south face minutes before collapse and nobody (including NIST) can provide a mechanism to cause it. Usually this means it didn't happen.

NIST's failing doesn't trump the fact that it actually happened. We're not asking you to do NIST's work, we're asking you to do your work and explain how a core-led collapse might produce bowing minutes earlier.

And please, no need to mention the N Tower S face again. Other videos/photos show the bowing on other faces of both towers.

 

[ozeco41]

This getting ridiculous. There are ample photos and videos both showing the bowing and that it preceded the collapse. That you demand video of one particular face to settle the argument is truly bizarre, and I can only assume it's because you know there is no such video.

He is probably specifying "video" to cut out still photos and eye witness reports and.....

Transparent trickery.

 

[Animal]

There is no video of inward bowing of the south face of the North Tower minutes before the collapse.

What you are showing has little credibility as there is no police officer quoted, it is first said three years after the event, and simply goes along with an unsupported contention in the NIST report that was due to be released shortly.

Your desperation is so unbecoming.

So now your demands as acceptable proof are only "video" How troofer of you. Meanwhile you hand wave away facts simply because your fantasy gets destroyed. Lame attempt at deflecting the facts.......because a report was written in 2004 doesn't mean the radio report did not occur.

The lack of credibility resides in your claim of CD....which to this day has resulted in exactly 0 proof.

Here is more According to Shyam-Sunder, the concave bowing of the steel was seen on the sides of the towers opposite where the planes hit them. At 10:06 a.m. that morning, an officer in a police helicopter reported that ``it's not going to take long before the north tower comes down.'' This was 20 minutes before it collapsed. In another radio transmission at 10:21 a.m., the officer said he saw buckling in the north tower's southern face, Shyam-Sunder said.

The report includes photographs taken from police helicopters showing the bending columns.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aCuh.ATdfOXc&refer=top_world_news

 

[GlennB]

He is probably specifying "video" to cut out still photos and eye witness reports and.....

Transparent trickery.

Well, the E face of the S Tower is shown clearly bowing in the Church St (iirc) video, which is of good quality.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

NIST's failing doesn't trump the fact that it actually happened. We're not asking you to do NIST's work, we're asking you to do your work and explain how a core-led collapse might produce bowing minutes earlier.

And please, no need to mention the N Tower S face again. Other videos/photos show the bowing on other faces of both towers.

In case you didn't understand I am saying the south face of the North Tower did not bow inward minutes before. It didn't happen until the core collapsed and pulled it inward, which was right before the exterior collapsed, as the inward bowing and buckling of the exterior was caused by the core collapse.

The minutes before inward bowing of the south face of the North Tower is a construct of the NIST report and that's all it is. There is no video evidence for it and no mechanism can be shown by them or anyone else to produce it.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Well, the E face of the S Tower is shown clearly bowing in the Church St (iirc) video, which is of good quality.

Only a couple of columns near the damaged northeast corner. There were videos which showed the entire east face of the south tower only being pulled inward when the entire upper section collapsed.

 

[NoahFence]

Correct Tony.

This spreading false meme of debunkers needs eradicating IMO.

"You cannot claim CD at WTC unless you provide a full alternate hypothesis for all of 9/11" Hogwash.

Hogwash?

It's all connected. Ignoring two of the three crime scenes is flat-out stupid. Yes, we can dismiss CD because there isn't a shred of evidence, but saying there isn't a shred of evidence is backed up in part because there is no connection between NYC and the other two crime scenes in the CD aka "insane" world.

So no, you can't claim CD at WTC unless you provide a full alternate hypothesis. UNLESS the claim is "coincidence" - which is full-bore straight jacket bunk.

If you claim CD at WTC that is all you have to prove. Demands that you prove all other aspects of 9/11 are improper.

Wrong.

I will press you as hard as anyone to meet your burden of proof. But only for whatever claim of yours is the current topic of discussion or argument. Sure I won't accept reversed burden of disproof. BUT I will never demand that you explain the plane at the Pentagon before I will accept your proof of CD at WTC.

Then you're playing their game by their rules. The rest of us use rules bound in reality.

 

[NoahFence]

My point is stronger than you give it credit for.

There is no video of inward bowing of the North Tower's south face minutes before collapse and nobody (including NIST) can provide a mechanism to cause it. Usually this means it didn't happen.

Is there video of the North Towers North, East or West face showing inward bowing?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Is there video of the North Towers North, East or West face showing inward bowing?

All of the faces were pulled inward when the core collapsed. The point here is there is no mechanism to cause it minutes before the core and entire upper section collapsed.

I haven't seen any videos showing inward bowing minutes before collapse except for a couple of columns at the damaged northeast corner of WTC 2. In that case the entire face is not bowed inward and does not do so until the upper section starts coming down.

The couple of columns bowed inward at the northeast corner of WTC 2 could have been caused by the aircraft engine, that was known to have been there, pulling them inward through the floors.

 

[GlennB]

Only a couple of columns near the damaged northeast corner. There were videos which showed the entire east face of the south tower only being pulled inward when the entire upper section collapsed.

A few columns? :



Meanwhile, why do you discount clear photographic evidence of bowing in the N tower? Why the obsession with video and one particular face?

 

[NoahFence]

Is it at all possible that the heat from the small localized massive fires weakened the exterior columns to such a degree that even the wind could cause the bowing, or at least contribute to it?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

A few columns? :

[qimg]http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/sap-guy/bowingcolumns.jpg[/qimg]

Meanwhile, why do you discount clear photographic evidence of bowing in the N tower? Why the obsession with video and one particular face?

[qimg]http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/sap-guy/wtc1bowing.jpg[/qimg]

I think the South Tower photo you show is when the building is collapsing, not minutes before.

The photos also don't prove when it happened. Where is your video?

 

[Animal]

A few columns? :

[qimg]http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/sap-guy/bowingcolumns.jpg[/qimg]

Meanwhile, why do you discount clear photographic evidence of bowing in the N tower? Why the obsession with video and one particular face?

[qimg]http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/sap-guy/wtc1bowing.jpg[/qimg]

TZ tries to dismiss the radio reports because they were described in a report in 2004. I have no doubt the transcript of the transmission exist, since they were widely reported. It is quite comical to see him try to hand wave them away in such desperation.

 

[GlennB]

I wouldn't use the word 'comical' here. The m/a probably bars me from using more appropriate words.

 

[Animal]

I wouldn't use the word 'comical' here. The m/a probably bars me from using more appropriate words.

I do try to be polite.

So we have visual evidence.....photo's........backed up by witness accounts and that is not good enough for TZ......who now demands VIDEO evidence.......yet the rest of the world is supposed to accept his CD fantasy on faith along......the sign of a religious cult.