Split Thread WTC7 collapse (again) - split from: How did you rule out that 911 was an insid

[Pardalis]

Building implosions are very distinctive, unmistakable.

You keep repeating this.

Buildings collapse for one basic reason, their structure cannot hold it together anymore. Either it was done intentionally or not, once the building's structural integrity has been compromised, gravity will bring it down pretty much the same way, towards the ground.

 

[CptColumbo]

Was he shown the firefighters testimonies, different angles of the tower in flames, was he shown these videos?:

He is an expert.
He saw enough to say that WTC7 was "absolutely" a CD.

So your answer to the question is "no?" What is the point of having an expert comment if you are not going to give him all the available evidence?

 

[Pardalis]

He saw enough to say that WTC7 was "absolutely" a CD.

You can't say that, because you don't know what he was shown.

 

[Christopher7]

How many have you seen?

10-20
I saw a special on the Learning Channel about how the Loizeaux family developed the fine art of building implosion, and step by step, how it's done.
It's too bad this video is no longer available. It contains some of their best work.

How many were due to CD and how many were due to a fire?

All were CD's
Every high rise building that has ever imploded was a CD.

 

[Pardalis]

Every high rise building that has ever imploded was a CD.

Assuming that is true, it doesn't mean WTC 7 had to be a CD. This is completely absurd reasoning.

 

[Christopher7]

You keep repeating this.

Buildings collapse for one basic reason, their structure cannot hold it together anymore. Either it was done intentionally or not, once the building's structural integrity has been compromised, gravity will bring it down pretty much the same way, towards the ground.

You keep avoiding the question:

Can you admit that WTC7 looks like a CD?

 

[Christopher7]

Assuming that is true, it doesn't mean WTC 7 had to be a CD. This is completely absurd reasoning.

Not assuming, please give an honest answer.

Does the implosion of WTC7 look like a CD?

 

[Totovader]

WTC7 was not attacked by airplanes.

Still doesn't help your case: there has never been a high rise building which has been attacked by planes which showered another building with debris when it collapsed.

WTC7 didn't just fall down, it imploded.

Imploded specifically means that it fell in on itself- that clearly was not the case with WTC7. You either don't know what the terminology is that you're using, or you're intentionally lying.

Building implosion is a fine art. It is extremely difficult to do.

Even if WTC7 was an "implosion" the fine art of doing so does not mean that WTC 7 was intentional. That gigantic leap in logic doesn't seem to bother conspiracists- but it's quite fallacious.

It couldn't be anything else imo.

Your opinion is clearly not based on fact.

Do you agree that WTC7 looks like a CD?

I've already answered this complex question fallacy.

Do you still beat your wife?

 

[Totovader]

He is an expert.
He saw enough to say that WTC7 was "absolutely" a CD.

Can you admit that WTC7 looks like a CD?

He is not an expert- regardless, you are saying your expert is wrong. You are saying you have more expertise than your expert... negating his expertise.

How do you resolve this contradiction? Miragememories was not able to- and ended up running away from the conversation. Are you going to do the same, or can you answer the question?

 

[Pardalis]

Chris, did you miss this post btw?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3304685&postcount=581

 

[Pardalis]

You keep avoiding the question:

Can you admit that WTC7 looks like a CD?

It doesn't matter what I, a layperson, thinks it looks like.

Do you want me to post that hyrax pic again?

Not assuming

Even if every high rise that ever imploded was a CD, do you see the error in logic you're making in thinking therefore WTC 7 had to be a CD?

 

[Christopher7]

Imploded specifically means that it fell in on itself- that clearly was not the case with WTC7.

FEMA 5-30
If the collapse initiated at these transfer trusses, this would explain why
the building imploded

5-31
the façade came straight down, suggesting an internal collapse.

Loss of strength due to the transfer trusses could explain why
the building imploded

 

[Christopher7]

He is not an expert

If the owner of a CD company isn't an expert, then who is?

 

[Pardalis]

FEMA 5-30
If the collapse initiated at these transfer trusses, this would explain why
the building imploded

5-31
the façade came straight down, suggesting an internal collapse.

Loss of strength due to the transfer trusses could explain why
the building imploded

bolding mine

You forgot that part.

We could play this word game all day. They used "imploded" as a figure of speech.

 

[Totovader]

FEMA 5-30
If the collapse initiated at these transfer trusses, this would explain why
the building imploded

5-31
the façade came straight down, suggesting an internal collapse.

Loss of strength due to the transfer trusses could explain why
the building imploded

Nice equivocation.

The fact remains- the building did not implode in the controlled demolition sense of the term. The building fell into other buildings on its way down, and fell outside of its own footprint... facts that conspiracists are often unwilling to admit.

 

[Pardalis]

Again Chris, you're avoiding the evidence

You made a claim:

FDNY did NOT say WTC7 would collapse, Chiefs Fellini and Hayden did not know for sure. Chief Norman did not think WTC7 would collapse.

I showed you this link:

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc

Could you please answer?

 

[Totovader]

If the owner of a CD company isn't an expert, then who is?

The owner of a CD company that does work similar to what you are claiming is being done, here.

Nice try- but you and I both know that Jowenko has never done anything remotely close to a high rise.

 

[Christopher7]

Chris, did you miss this post btw?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3304685&postcount=581

I've seen that list. Fellini and one other guy thought WTC7 was going to collapse. All the others were heard about it thru the grapevine.

You are still avoiding the question

Can you admit that the implosion of WTC 7 looks like a CD?

 

[Pardalis]

I've seen that list. Fellini and one other guy thought WTC7 was going to collapse. All the others were heard about it thru the grapevine.

I just showed you otherwise.

You are a liar.

Can you admit that the implosion of WTC 7 looks like a CD?

SO WHAT?

 

[Totovader]

I've seen that list. Fellini and one other guy thought WTC7 was going to collapse. All the others were heard about it thru the grapevine.

You are still avoiding the question

Can you admit that the implosion of WTC 7 looks like a CD?

Clearly, you're wrong:

Firehouse: Other people tell me that there were a lot of firefighters in the street who were visible, and they put out traffic cones to mark them off?

Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o�clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o�clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Source